Adult Male Svori Participants Reentry Evaluation August 2008
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation THE MULTI-SITE EVALUATION OF THE SERIOUS AND VIOLENT OFFENDER REENTRY INITIATIVE August 2008 Pamela K. Lattimore Christy A. Visher Danielle M. Steffey Acknowledgments The Multi-site Evaluation of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) is supported by grant number 2004RE-CX-002 from the National Institute of Justice (U.S. Department of Justice) and is conducted by RTI International and the Urban Institute. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Department of Justice. Principal Investigators Pamela K. Lattimore, RTI International Christy A. Visher, Urban Institute Report Authors Pamela K. Lattimore, RTI International Christy A. Visher, Urban Institute Danielle M. Steffey, RTI International Staff Contributors Susan M. Brumbaugh, RTI International Jenny L. Osborne, Urban Institute RTI and the Urban Institute also acknowledge the assistance and direction provided by the members of our external advisory group, as well as the assistance and support of the local SVORI project directors and other site staff. For more information about the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation, please visit our website at http://www.svori-evaluation.org/. iii Contents Section Page Executive Summary ES-1 Introduction 1 The SVORI Multi-site Evaluation—Design and Methods ........... 3 SVORI Program Overview .................................................. 7 Characteristics of the SVORI and Non-SVORI Comparison Respondents 13 Demographic Characteristics .............................................13 Housing .........................................................................17 Family and Children .........................................................17 Substance Use and Physical and Mental Health ....................20 Employment History and Financial Support ..........................28 Criminal History, Violence, Victimization, and Gang Involvement ............................................................33 In-Prison Experiences .......................................................35 Service Needs 43 Service Need Bundle Scores ..............................................44 Transitional Services ........................................................45 Health Services ...............................................................48 Employment/Education/Skills Services ................................50 Domestic Violence Services ...............................................52 Child Services .................................................................53 Levels of Need across Services ..........................................55 Service Receipt 59 Service Receipt Bundle Scores ...........................................60 Coordination Services .......................................................60 Transitional Services ........................................................63 Health Services ...............................................................65 Employment/Education/Skills Services ................................67 Domestic Violence Services ...............................................70 v Child Services .................................................................71 Levels of Receipt across Services .......................................72 Conclusions 77 Characteristics of Respondents ..........................................77 Service Needs .................................................................79 Service Receipt ...............................................................80 Comparability of SVORI and Non-SVORI Respondents ...........81 Implications ....................................................................84 Future Reports ................................................................84 References Appendix A. Data Tables vi 85 A-1 Exhibits Exhibit Number Page 1 States and agencies selected for the impact evaluation..... 4 2 Adult male sample sizes, by state and group ................... 6 3 Mean proportion of offenders receiving pre- and postrelease services, by group (as reported by SVORI program directors) ...................................................... 9 4 Service receipt bundle scores, by group, pre- and postrelease (as reported by SVORI program directors) ......... 11 5 Demographic characteristics of respondents at time of interview, by group ................................................... 14 6 Age at time of interview, by site and group ................... 15 7 Race (white or black), by site and group....................... 16 8 Completed 12th grade or obtained a GED, by site and group ...................................................................... 17 9 Percentages of fathers reporting on child care or child support responsibilities, by group ................................ 18 10 Criminal history and substance use of family and peers, by group .................................................................. 19 11 Lifetime substance use, by group ................................ 21 12 Lifetime use of cocaine, heroin, and hallucinogens, by site and group .......................................................... 22 13 Substance use during the 30 days prior to incarceration, by site and group ...................................................... 23 14 Use of specific substances during the 30 days prior to incarceration, by group .............................................. 23 15 Any substance use treatment prior to current incarceration, by site and group .................................. 24 16 Lifetime health problems, by group .............................. 25 17 Current health problems, by group .............................. 26 18 Average scores on Brief Symptom Inventory subscales, by group .................................................................. 27 19 Employment prior to incarceration, by group ................. 29 vii 20 Employment during the 6 months prior to incarceration, by site and group ...................................................... 30 21 Characteristics of respondents’ jobs prior to incarceration, by group .................................................................. 30 22 Sources of income during the 6 months prior to incarceration, by employment status and group............. 32 23 Criminal history of respondents, by group ..................... 33 24 Conviction offenses for current incarceration, by group ... 34 25 Average duration of incarceration at time of interview, by site and group ...................................................... 36 26 Disciplinary infractions and administrative segregations during current incarceration, by group ......................... 37 27 Institutional employment, by site and group ................. 38 28 Work-release participation, by site and group ................ 39 29 Frequency of in-prison contact with family members and friends, by group ...................................................... 40 30 Amount of contact with family members and friends at time of interview compared with contact when first incarcerated ............................................................. 41 31 Service need bundle scores across service bundles, by group ...................................................................... 44 32 Self-reported need for specific transitional services, by group ...................................................................... 45 33 Average service need bundle scores for the transitional services bundle, by site and group ............................... 47 34 Self-reported need for specific health services, by group ...................................................................... 48 35 Average service need bundle scores for the health services bundle, by site and group ............................... 49 36 Self-reported need for specific employment, education, and skills services, by group ....................................... 50 37 Average service need bundle scores for the employment/education/skills services bundle, by site and group ...................................................................... 52 38 Average service need bundle scores for the domestic violence services bundle, by site and group................... 53 39 Self-reported need for specific child services, by group ... 54 40 Average service need bundle scores for the child services bundle, by site and group ........................................... 55 41 Most commonly reported service needs, by group .......... 56 42 Average service need bundle scores for all services, by site and group .......................................................... 57 43 Service receipt bundle scores across service bundles, by group ...................................................................... 60 44 Self-reported receipt of specific coordination services, by group ...................................................................... 61 viii 45 Average service receipt bundle scores for the coordination services bundle, by site and group ............................... 62 46 Self-reported receipt of specific transitional services, by group ...................................................................... 63 47 Average service receipt bundle scores for the transitional services bundle, by site and group ............................... 64 48 Self-reported receipt of specific health services, by group ...................................................................... 66 49 Average service receipt bundle scores for the health services bundle, by site and group ............................... 67 50 Self-reported receipt of specific employment, education, and skills services, by group ....................................... 68 51 Average service receipt bundle scores for the employment/education/skills services bundle, by site and group ...................................................................... 69 52 Average service receipt bundle scores for the domestic violence services bundle, by site and group................... 71 53 Average service receipt bundle scores for the child services bundle, by site and group ............................... 72 54 Most commonly reported services received, by group ..... 73 55 Average service receipt bundle scores for all services, by site and group .......................................................... 74 56 Statistically significant differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents. ............................................ 83 A-1 Adult male case disposition—Wave 1 (pre-release) ....... A-1 A-2 Respondent characteristics, by group .......................... A-2 A-3 Proportion of respondents who reported needing specific services, by group .................................................. A-11 A-4 Proportion of respondents who reported receiving specific services, by group .................................................. A-12 ix Executive Summary The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) funded agencies in 2003 to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing outcomes for released prisoners. Sixty-nine agencies received federal funds ($500,000 to $2,000,000 over 3 years) to develop 89 programs. The SVORI multi-site evaluation was funded by the National Institute of Justice in the spring of 2003 and included prerelease and follow-up interviews with nearly 2400 returning prisoners. Sixteen programs are included in the impact evaluation, comprising 12 adult programs and 4 juvenile programs located in 14 states: Colorado (juveniles only), Florida (juveniles only), Indiana, Iowa, Kansas (adults and juveniles), Maine, Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina (adults and juveniles), and Washington. This report presents findings from the pre-release interviews conducted with adult males in the 12 adult impact sites. The sample includes 863 men who were enrolled in SVORI programs and 834 comparison men who did not receive SVORI programming. The data presented in this report are primarily descriptive and convey characteristics of the respondents, as well as their pre-prison and incarceration experiences. Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents are presented for the purpose of assessing pre-release comparability between groups. Characteristics of the SVORI and non-SVORI Comparison Respondents The average age of the respondents was 29 years, and about half were black and one-third were white. ES-1 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation About 60% had a high school diploma or GED. Prior to incarceration, most respondents reported living in a house or apartment that belonged to someone else, and nearly all reported having family members and friends who had been convicted of a crime or had problems with drugs or alcohol. Substance Use and Physical and Mental Health Nearly all respondents reported having used alcohol and marijuana, whereas more than half reported cocaine use. Of those who had ever used drugs, about two-thirds reported having used one or more illicit drugs during the 30 days prior to their incarceration. Most respondents reported few physical health problems, and most described their mental health status at the time of the pre-release interview as excellent or very good. Employment History and Financial Support Most study participants reported having worked at some point during their lifetimes, and about two-thirds reported working during the 6 months prior to prison. Of those working during the 6 months prior to prison, about three-quarters described their most recent job as a permanent job for which they received formal pay. Nearly half of the respondents reported supplementing their legal income with income from illegal activities, with those who had no job prior to prison more likely to report illegal income. Criminal History The respondents reported an average age at first arrest of 16 and an average of 12 arrests. Most respondents had been previously incarcerated and about half had been detained in a juvenile facility. At the time of the interview, respondents reported an average length of incarceration of more than 2 years. Most respondents indicated that family members had served as an important source of support during their incarceration. Although the SVORI and comparison respondents were similar on many of several hundred measures, they differed on a few measures: ES-2 SVORI respondents were more likely to be black and less likely to be white than comparison respondents. Executive Summary — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Non-SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than SVORI respondents to indicate symptoms of hostility and psychosis on the mental health subscales. Self-reports on “ever using” drugs indicated somewhat higher usage among the non-SVORI respondents. SVORI respondents were somewhat less likely to have been employed prior to incarceration. On some indicators, SVORI respondents were less involved in pre-prison substance use. SVORI respondents were less likely to be in prison for a parole violation. SVORI respondents were more likely to be serving time for a drug crime. SVORI respondents had spent more time in prison during the current incarceration. SVORI respondents reported more disciplinary infractions and administrative segregations than were reported by the non-SVORI respondents, which may be associated with their longer lengths of stay. Levels of Service Needs Respondents reported high levels of service needs across the spectrum of 28 services included in the interview; on average, respondents reported needing more than half of the services. The most common needs reported by SVORI respondents were education (94%), financial assistance (86%), a driver’s license (83%), job training (82%), and employment (80%). SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were similar on most measures, but non-SVORI respondents were significantly less likely than SVORI respondents to report needing financial assistance or access to clothing and food banks and more likely than SVORI respondents to report needing mental health or substance abuse treatment, domestic violence support groups, or a change in their criminal attitudes. Levels of Service Receipt SVORI programs were successful in greatly increasing access to a wide range of services and programming. The SVORI respondents were much more likely than the non-SVORI respondents to report receiving most of the services we asked about. ES-3 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation The most common services SVORI respondents reported receiving were participating in programs to prepare for release, meeting with a case manager, working with someone to plan for release, taking a class specifically for release, and receiving a needs assessment. There were only four services for which the difference in service receipt between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents was not significant: assistance modifying custody agreements, batterer intervention programs, medical treatment, and assistance accessing public financial assistance. Overall, SVORI respondents reported receiving about one-third of the service items—in contrast to the onefifth of items that non-SVORI respondents reported receiving. The results from these interviews show that our SVORI and non-SVORI groups are similar on most characteristics and that those who participated in SVORI programs were more likely to receive pre-release programming and services. These findings set the stage for future examinations of outcomes. ES-4 Introduction The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) was a collaborative federal effort, established in 2003, to improve outcomes for adults and juveniles returning to their communities after a period of incarceration. The initiative sought to help states better utilize their correctional resources to address outcomes along criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing dimensions. Funded by the U.S. Departments of Justice, Labor, Education, Housing and Urban Development, and Health and Human Services, SVORI was an unprecedented national response to the challenges of prisoner reentry. Sixty-nine state and local grantees (corrections and juvenile justice agencies) received SVORI funding, representing all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. These grantees developed 89 programs that targeted adult and juvenile correctional populations. SVORI funding was intended to create a three-phase continuum of services for returning prisoners that began during the period of incarceration, intensified just prior to release and during the early months post-release, and continued for several years following release as former inmates took on more productive and independent roles in the community. The SVORI programs attempted to address the initiative’s goals and provide a wide range of wellcoordinated services to returning prisoners. Although SVORI programs shared the common goals of improving outcomes across various dimensions and improving service coordination and systems collaboration, programs differed substantially in their approach and implementation (Winterfield and Lindquist, 2005; Winterfield and Brumbaugh, 2005; Lindquist, 2005; Winterfield et al., 2006). 1 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation SVORI Evaluation Research Questions To what extent did SVORI lead to more coordinated and integrated services among partner agencies? To what extent did SVORI participants receive more individualized and comprehensive services than comparable individuals not enrolled in SVORI? To what extent did SVORI participants demonstrate better recidivism, employment, health, and personal functioning outcomes than individuals not enrolled in SVORI? To what extent did the benefits derived from SVORI programming exceed the costs? In spring 2003, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) awarded RTI International, a nonprofit research organization, a grant to evaluate programs funded by SVORI. The Urban Institute, a nonpartisan economic and social policy research organization, is collaborating on this project, which is one of the largest evaluation studies ever funded by NIJ. Through data collected from grantee staff, partnering agencies, and returning prisoners, this 6-year study involves a comprehensive implementation evaluation of all 89 SVORI programs, an intensive impact evaluation of 16 selected programs, and an economic analysis on a subset of the impact sites (see Lattimore et al., 2005). The goal of the SVORI evaluation is to document the implementation of SVORI programs and determine whether they have accomplished SVORI’s overall goal of increasing public safety by reducing recidivism among the populations served. The implementation assessment addresses the extent to which the 89 SVORI programs (69 grantees) increased access to services and promoted systems change. The impact evaluation is assessing the effectiveness of SVORI by comparing key outcomes among those who received services as part of SVORI and a comparable group of individuals who received “treatment as usual” in the 16 sites participating in the impact evaluation. The impact evaluation includes a longitudinal study of 2,391 returning prisoners (adult males, adult females, and juvenile males) who were interviewed approximately 1 month prior to release and then again at 3, 9, and 15 months after release. 1 The third component of the evaluation, an economic analysis, is intended to determine the return on SVORI investment and will include both a cost-benefit and a cost-effectiveness analysis. This report presents findings from the pre-release interviews conducted with adult males in the 12 adult impact sites. The sample includes 863 SVORI program participants and 834 comparison men who were not enrolled in SVORI programs. The data presented in this report are primarily descriptive and 1 2 A total of 2,583 pre-release interviews were completed out of 2,982 that were fielded (86.6% completion rate). Nearly 200 (192) of those who completed a baseline interview were not released during the 18 months in which the initial post-release interview was being conducted; these 192 subjects were excluded from the study as not eligible for the evaluation. Evaluation eligibility requirements included prison release, because the focus of the evaluation is reentry into the community. Introduction — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents are presented for the purpose of assessing pre-release comparability between groups. convey characteristics of the subjects, as well as their preprison and incarceration experiences. Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents are presented for the purpose of assessing pre-release comparability between the two groups. Immediately below, we provide an overview of the design of the SVORI impact evaluation, including the selection of respondents and the interview process. We then provide a brief summary of the characteristics of the local SVORI programs, derived from surveys of the SVORI program directors. This description is followed by a presentation of findings from the pre-release interviews. The findings are presented in the following order: First, we present the demographic characteristics of the SVORI and non-SVORI adult males. We then describe their self-reported pre-prison housing status; relationships with family and peers; health status, including physical and mental health and substance use; employment and education history; criminal history, violence perpetration, and victimization; and in-prison experiences. The subsequent sections provide detailed descriptions of the respondents’ selfreported service needs and in-prison service receipt. The report concludes with a discussion of the comparability of our evaluation groups, implications of our findings, and a description of forthcoming reports. THE SVORI MULTI-SITE EVALUATION— DESIGN AND METHODS The impact evaluation component of the SVORI multi-site evaluation includes a longitudinal study of adult male, adult female, and juvenile male returning prisoners. Data collection consisted of four waves of in-person, computer-assisted interviews: the pre-release interview (Wave 1) conducted about 1 month prior to expected release 2 and three follow-up interviews (Waves 2 through 4) conducted 3, 9, and 15 months following release. In addition, oral swab drug tests were conducted during the 3- and 15-month interviews for adult respondents who were interviewed in a community setting. The interview and drug test data will be supplemented with administrative records obtained from state correctional agencies and arrest data to examine recidivism outcomes. 2 The median time to release at the time of the interview was 30 days. 3 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation The 16 sites included in the impact evaluation were 12 adult programs and 4 juvenile programs located in 14 states. Exhibit 1 lists these impact sites. The sites are diverse in programmatic approach and represent reasonable geographic diversity. Criteria Used to Select Impact Sites The program had clearly defined elements and goals. 4 The program was or was expected to be fully implemented. The program target population was accessible and was expected to be of sufficient size. An appropriate comparison population was available and accessible for inclusion in the study. Administrative data were of good quality and available for the evaluation. The program was amenable and able to participate in the evaluation. Exhibit 1. States and agencies selected for the impact evaluation State CO FL Grantee Agency Colorado Department of Corrections Florida Department of Juvenile Justice IA IN KS KS ME MD Iowa Department of Corrections Indiana Department of Corrections Kansas Department of Corrections Kansas Juvenile Justice Authority Maine Department of Corrections Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services Missouri Department of Corrections Nevada Department of Corrections Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections Oklahoma Department of Corrections Pennsylvania Department of Corrections South Carolina Department of Corrections South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice Washington State Department of Corrections MO NV OH OK PA SC SC WA Focus of Impact Evaluation Juveniles Juveniles (Dade County) Adults Adults Adults Juveniles Adults Adults Adults Adults Adults Adults Adults Adults Juveniles Adults A site-specific research design was developed for each impact site. In two sites (Iowa and Ohio), a random assignment evaluation design was implemented by the programs. In the remaining sites, comparison groups were developed by isolating the criteria that local site staff used to identify individuals eligible for enrollment in their SVORI program (these included factors such as age, criminal history, risk level, post-release supervision, transfer to pre-release facilities, and county of release). Where possible, the comparison subjects came from the same pre-release facilities and were returning to the same post-release geographic areas as the SVORI participants. In some instances, comparison subjects were identified as those who met all eligibility criteria except pre- or post-release geographic parameters. When this occurred, we selected our Introduction — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report comparison sample from pre-release facilities that were comparable to facilities in which SVORI was available or individuals from SVORI facilities that were returning to a different but similar geographic area. Eligible respondents (both SVORI and comparison) were identified on a monthly basis during the 17-month pre-release interview period. 3 Pre-release interviews were conducted from July 2004 through November 2005 in more than 150 prisons and juvenile detention facilities. In addition to obtaining approval from the Institutional Review Boards at RTI and the Urban Institute, memoranda of agreement and/or formal research agreements were negotiated with all agencies, and evaluation staff ensured that study procedures were approved by all facilities (and/or correctional agencies overseeing the facilities) in which interviews were conducted. The interviews were conducted in private settings by experienced RTI field interviewers using computer-assisted personal interviewing methodology. Prerelease interviews were conducted approximately 30 days prior to release and were designed to obtain data on the respondents’ characteristics and pre-prison experiences, as well as incarceration experiences and services received since admission to prison. These interviews also obtained data on the respondents’ post-release plans and expectations about reentry. Despite the complexity of collecting Wave 1 data on an ongoing basis in more than 150 correctional institutions in 14 states, the field staff had minimal difficulties. Despite the complexity of collecting Wave 1 data on an ongoing basis in more than 150 correctional institutions in 14 states, the field staff had minimal difficulties. The primary problem during the early phases of fielding the interview involved our reliance on often inaccurate expected release dates for individuals identified as eligible for the study. Site contacts provided lists of eligible individuals with expected release dates within 90 days. However, early in the interviewing period, it became evident that a sizeable number of eligible individuals were being released before an interview could be scheduled. To alleviate 3 Every effort was made to identify SVORI program refusers and exclude them from the evaluation. These efforts included working with local program staff to ensure that individuals refusing to participate in SVORI were not included on lists of potential comparison subjects. In some cases, SVORI program refusers were interviewed as comparison subjects; however, the evaluation team dropped these individuals from the comparison group when their prior program refusal was discovered. In addition, SVORI program directors reported few refusals among those identified for potential participation in SVORI. 5 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation this problem, we worked with site contacts to obtain information about the maximum amount of “good time” a potential respondent could earn in order to factor good time credits into release-date projections. 4 This change in procedure minimized the number of eligible individuals who were released before they could be interviewed. Among eligible sample members approached for interviews, we experienced very low refusal rates, on average less than 12% across the 12 adult male sites. 5 A breakdown of the categories of refusals and ineligible cases is available in Appendix Exhibit A-1. Exhibit 2 presents the distribution of adult male pre-release interview respondents by state and by group (i.e., SVORI or non-SVORI). The findings presented in the subsequent sections are based on the data collected during interviews with these 1,697 respondents. Exhibit 2. Adult male sample sizes, by state and group State Iowa Indiana Kansas Maine Maryland Missouri Nevada Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Carolina Washington Total 4 SVORI 114 64 23 35 130 36 107 47 42 57 179 29 863 Non-SVORI 55 94 48 44 124 50 50 38 51 66 166 48 834 Total 169 158 71 79 254 86 157 85 93 123 345 77 1,697 % of Total 10.0 9.3 4.2 4.7 15.0 5.1 9.2 5.0 5.5 7.2 20.3 4.5 100.0 Inaccurate expected release dates are a common problem in management information systems maintained centrally by departments of correction. Information that is needed to accurately predict a release date—such as good time credits, infractions that result in cancellation of good time—is often maintained primarily by the institution where the inmate is residing prior to release. 5 We have no reason to expect that these "early releases" were anything other than random or that the early release was related to participation in SVORI programs. 6 Introduction — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI Goals To improve quality of life and selfsufficiency through employment, housing, family, and community involvement To improve health by addressing substance use (sobriety and relapse prevention) and physical and mental health To reduce criminality through supervision and monitoring of noncompliance, reoffending, rearrest, reconviction, and reincarceration To achieve systems change through multiagency collaboration and case management strategies SVORI PROGRAM OVERVIEW The federal guidance accompanying SVORI funding placed few restrictions on the state agencies with respect to the design of the individual SVORI programs. The primary restrictions placed on local SVORI programs were an age limit—the programs were required to target prisoners 35 and younger—and a requirement for post-release community supervision. 6 Other broad requirements were that the program should include three phases (in-prison, supervised post-release, and postsupervision); provide holistic case management and service delivery; improve participants’ quality of life and self-sufficiency through employment, housing, family, and community involvement; improve participants’ health by addressing substance use and physical and mental health; and reduce participants’ criminality through supervision and monitoring of noncompliance. The programs also were encouraged to include needs and risk assessments, reentry plans, transition teams, community resources, and graduated sanctions (see Winterfield et al., 2006). Because there was not a specified SVORI program model, each program was locally designed, and the programs varied considerably in approach, services provided, and target populations. Across the 52 adult programs, 24% were starting new programs, while the remainder used the grant funds primarily to fill service gaps (43%) or to expand existing services (33%). Among the 12 adult impact sites however, 50% were starting new programs. Most grantees received access to 10% of their grant funds to use for planning and design in late 2002. Access to full funding varied dramatically over the programs, with most receiving full spending approval in 2003 but for others it was 2004 or later. When we surveyed program directors in 2005 (see below), 74% reported that their programs were fully implemented. We previously developed descriptions of each of the SVORI programs (Lattimore et al., 2004) and provided an analysis of the overall characteristics of SVORI programs, including barriers to implementation (Lattimore et al., 2005). Here, we focus on the types and variety of specific services that program 6 Some programs requested and received exemptions for one or both of these requirements. 7 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation directors reported were available through their SVORI programs. The SVORI Multi-site Evaluation team surveyed all SVORI program directors in 2005. 7 One question asked the program directors to identify the primary focus of their programs. The directors of the 52 adult programs reported the following 8 : SVORI participants were more likely to be receiving all of the services except for prerelease medical and dental services. employment (42%) community integration (27%) substance use (14%) mental health (10%) education (2%) family (0%) The program directors also reported on the percentage of SVORI participants who were receiving each of 28 pre-release and 30 post-release services or programs. 9 They also were asked to estimate the proportion of individuals comparable to SVORI participants who were receiving these services and programs. Winterfield et al. (2006) presented an analysis of these data that assigned these services/programs to one of five “service bundles.” Exhibit 3 shows the mean proportion of SVORI participants and non-SVORI comparisons estimated to be receiving each specified service pre- and post-release. As can be seen, the program directors reported that higher proportions of SVORI participants were receiving all of the services except for pre-release medical and dental services, where the estimated mean proportion for non-SVORI was slightly higher than SVORI (for medical, 79% SVORI and 83% non-SVORI; for dental, 77% SVORI, 81% non-SVORI). It is important to note, however, that for almost all of the services, the range in reported values across all 52 sites was “none” to “all” for both SVORI and non-SVORI individuals. In other words, at least one program director reported that no individual received a particular service, and at least one program director reported that all individuals received the service. 7 The response rate was 100%. The results for the adult impact sites differed somewhat. These 12 program directors identified community integration (50%), employment (33.3%), and substance use (16.7%) as the primary focus of their programs. 9 Response categories were 0%, 1%–25%, 26%–50%, 51%–75%, 76%–99%, and 100%. 8 8 Introduction — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 3. Mean proportion of offenders receiving pre- and post-release services, by group (as reported by SVORI program directors) Pre-Release SVORI Non-SVORI Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Service Bundle 1: Coordination Services Risk assessment 0.92 (0.23) 0.68 (0.42) Needs assessment 0.92 (0.23) 0.74 (0.39) Treatment/release plan development 0.92 (0.25) 0.64 (0.37) Formal post-release supervision N/A N/A Bundle 2: Transitional Services Legal assistance 0.37 (0.41) 0.35 (0.40) 0.62 (0.41) 0.42 (0.38) Assistance obtaining identification (e.g., driver’s license, Social Security card) Assistance obtaining benefits and completing 0.46 (0.42) 0.29 (0.32) applications (e.g., Medicaid, disability) Financial support/emergency assistance 0.31 (0.41) 0.15 (0.23) Peer support groups 0.46 (0.41) 0.23 (0.27) One-on-one mentoring 0.40 (0.40) 0.13 (0.19) Housing placements or referrals 0.56 (0.38) 0.35 (0.33) Transportation N/A N/A Bundle 3: Health Services Comprehensive drug treatment programs 0.36 (0.33) 0.30 (0.25) AA/NA 0.44 (0.36) 0.39 (0.32) Counseling sessions 0.69 (0.38) 0.43 (0.35) Mental health services 0.47 (0.37) 0.40 (0.33) Anger management/violence counseling 0.61 (0.37) 0.41 (0.31) Medical services 0.79 (0.35) 0.83 (0.32) Dental services 0.77 (0.37) 0.81 (0.35) Bundle 4: Employment, Education, and Skills Development Services Education/GED/tutoring/literacy 0.61 (0.33) 0.55 (0.31) Vocational training 0.38 (0.32) 0.32 (0.26) Employment referrals/job placement 0.51 (0.43) 0.24 (0.27) Resumé and interviewing skills development 0.67 (0.39) 0.34 (0.32) Work-release program 0.22 (0.32) 0.16 (0.20) 0.65 (0.37) 0.37 (0.31) Cognitive skills development/behavioral programming Life skills training 0.74 (0.35) 0.41 (0.33) Bundle 5: Family Services Domestic violence services 0.33 (0.38) 0.20 (0.23) Parenting skills development 0.49 (0.39) 0.27 (0.28) Family reunification 0.41 (0.38) 0.18 (0.23) Family counseling 0.14 (0.27) 0.07 (0.09) Post-Release SVORI Non-SVORI Mean (SD) Mean (SD) 0.90 (0.27) 0.89 (0.29) 0.92 (0.25) 0.93 (0.16) 0.68 (0.43) 0.64 (0.43) 0.63 (0.41) 0.72 (0.28) 0.17 (0.26) 0.58 (0.40) 0.12 (0.18) 0.31 (0.34) 0.55 (0.40) 0.30 (0.33) 0.57 (0.37) 0.39 (0.39) 0.31 (0.33) 0.58 (0.36) 0.55 (0.36) 0.25 (0.28) 0.13 (0.19) 0.08 (0.09) 0.29 (0.28) 0.24 (0.29) 0.31 (0.30) 0.45 (0.30) 0.64 (0.36) 0.41 (0.35) 0.42 (0.34) 0.35 (0.37) 0.26 (0.33) 0.24 (0.21) 0.39 (0.28) 0.37 (0.33) 0.25 (0.25) 0.24 (0.24) 0.20 (0.25) 0.16 (0.23) 0.38 (0.34) 0.35 (0.34) 0.73 (0.32) 0.67 (0.38) 0.13 (0.26) 0.52 (0.39) 0.21 (0.23) 0.20 (0.24) 0.38 (0.32) 0.27 (0.31) 0.08 (0.17) 0.30 (0.32) 0.55 (0.40) 0.26 (0.33) 0.30 (0.34) 0.37 (0.34) 0.37 (0.35) 0.20 (0.26) 0.13 (0.15) 0.18 (0.21) 0.19 (0.26) 0.12 (0.17) AA=Alcoholics Anonymous, GED=general educational development, NA=Narcotics Anonymous, N/A=not applicable, SD=standard deviation. Values were calculated by taking the midpoint of the response categories reported by the 52 SVORI adult program directors for each of the services (see footnote 9 on page 8). Source: 2005 survey of SVORI program directors; data are from Tables 1 and 2 of Winterfield et al. (2006), pp. 6-7. 9 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation The pre-release services most commonly reported were needs assessment (92% SVORI, 74% non-SVORI), risk assessment (92% SVORI, 68% non-SVORI), treatment/release plan development (92% of SVORI respondents, 64% of non-SVORI respondents), medical services (79% SVORI, 83% non-SVORI), dental services (77% SVORI, 81% non-SVORI), and life skills training (74% SVORI, 41% non-SVORI). The most highly provided post-release services reported were formal post-release supervision (93% SVORI, 72% nonSVORI), treatment/release plan development (92% SVORI, 63% non-SVORI), risk assessment (90% SVORI, 68% nonSVORI), needs assessment (89% SVORI, 64% non-SVORI), job referrals and placement (73% SVORI, 38% non-SVORI), and resumé and interviewing skills development services (67% SVORI, 27% non-SVORI). Service bundle scores range from 0 to 100 and can be interpreted as the average proportion of services in a bundle received by an average program participant (multiplied by 100). As described in Winterfield et al. (2006), we subsequently generated service bundle scores for each of the five pre-release and five post-release bundles. 10 These scores were generated by dividing the sum of the item scores within each bundle by the number of items in the bundle and multiplying the result by 100 to get site-level scores. These site-level scores were then averaged to obtain overall scores. The bundle scores can take on values between 0 and 100. A score of 0 would mean that the program directors indicated no one was to receive any of the services/programs included in the bundle, whereas a score of 100 means that the program directors indicated that everyone was to receive all services in the bundle. Interim values can be interpreted as the average proportion of services in a bundle received by the average program participant (multiplied by 100). However, these values can result from various scenarios. Taking a simple two-service-item example: A score of 50 results if everyone receives one service and no one receives the other OR if half receive both services. In other words, the bundle score provides an average but does not provide information on the distribution of services within the bundle to individuals. 10 10 The midpoints of the categories shown in footnote 9 were used to calculate the program director bundle scores (e.g., .13 for the 1%– 25% category. Introduction — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI programs, overall, were designed to provide an increased level of services and programming to program participants. Results are shown in Exhibit 4. The ranges in values across programs for the bundle scores were quite large for both SVORI and non-SVORI. For example, at least one SVORI program reported that no SVORI program participant received any prerelease transitional services. In addition, in some cases, the level of services provided to non-SVORI comparisons (i.e., the status quo) was quite high. At least one program provided all pre-release coordination services to all comparable individuals who were not in the SVORI program. However, the scores clearly indicate that, overall, the SVORI programs were designed to provide an increased level of services and programming to program participants. Exhibit 4. Service receipt bundle scores, by group, pre- and post-release (as reported by SVORI program directors) Service Bundle Pre-Release Service Bundles Coordination Transitional Health Employment/education/skills Family Post-Release Service Bundles Coordination Transitional Health Employment/education/skills Family SVORI Max Mean 8.7 0.0 7.4 1.9 0.0 100.0 94.6 94.7 85.9 100.0 91.7 43.1 56.1 51.9 33.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 95.3 85.8 91.1 100.0 89.2 43.4 39.0 46.0 30.5 Min Non-SVORI Max Mean 0.0 1.9 10.9 0.0 0.0 100.0 76.9 82.3 85.7 68.8 68.6 25.3 47.7 32.1 17.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 75.0 71.4 85.7 75.0 63.2 19.1 24.8 22.1 14.7 Min Source: Winterfield et al. (2006), Tables 3 and 4, pp. 10, 12. The following sections describe characteristics of the adult male respondents who participated in the pre-release interviews, including demographics, pre-prison and in-prison experiences, service needs, and receipt of services during the period of incarceration. 11 Characteristics of the SVORI and NonSVORI Comparison Respondents This section provides descriptive information about the 1,697 adult male SVORI and non-SVORI respondents interviewed in the 12 adult impact sites. (Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A provides the means, standard deviations, and t-statistics for the variables discussed in this section.) The first subsection provides demographic information, followed by information on housing status and family and peers. The next subsection provides information on pre-prison and current health, including measures of physical and mental health and substance use. The next to last subsection provides information on pre-prison employment, sources of financial support, and in-prison work experience. The final subsection describes the criminal justice experiences of the respondents. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS The men in the SVORI and non-SVORI samples were almost exclusively U.S. born (100% and 98% of the SVORI and nonSVORI respondents, respectively) and spoke English as a first language (98% and 97%, SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). In addition, as shown in Exhibit 5, more than half (57%) of the SVORI respondents were black and 31% were white. 11 The SVORI sample included a higher percentage of black men and a 11 Respondents were allowed to select all that applied. Individuals who reported more than one race are coded here as “other,” which also includes American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian or East Indian, and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. 13 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation lower percentage of white men than the non-SVORI comparison sample, which was 50% black and 37% white. Only 4% of both groups identified themselves as Hispanic. 12 Exhibit 5. Demographic characteristics of respondents at time of interview, by group Variable Race SVORI Black* 57% 50% White* 31% 37% Hispanic 4% 4% Other race Age 8% 9% 28.9 29.3 61% 58% Age at interview (mean) Non-SVORI Education 12th grade/GED *p < 0.05 The average age of respondents in both samples was about 29 years. As is evident from Exhibit 5, respondents in both groups had substantial educational deficiencies. Well over one-third (39% SVORI and 42% non-SVORI) had not completed 12th grade or earned a GED. Given the diversity in the states selected for the impact evaluation, it is not surprising that we found that demographic characteristics varied among the 12 sites. For example, Exhibit 6 shows the average age at the time of the pre-release interview for respondents by group and site. The overall mean age was 29 years; however, average age ranged from a low of 22.6 years for Maine respondents to a high of 35.1 years for Indiana non-SVORI respondents. 13 Only the average age difference between groups for the Iowa respondents was statistically significant (27.0 years for SVORI, 28.9 years for non-SVORI). 12 Individuals are coded Hispanic if they chose “Hispanic, Latino or Spanish,” regardless of whether they chose a race category. 13 Although the SVORI funding guidelines mandated that funds be used for individuals 35 years or younger, many states requested and received waivers of this requirement. 14 Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI 25 Years 34.6 32.5 27.5 27.1 28.9 30.0 27.2 27.4 26.2 26.0 28.8 28.4 26.4 27.1 Non-SVORI 28.4 27.8 22.7 22.6 30 27.0 28.9 35 27.8 26.8 40 32.8 35.1 Exhibit 6. Age at time of interview, by site and group 20 15 10 5 0 IA* IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. There were racial and ethnic differences among the state samples. Race and ethnic differences across the state samples (and, within a state, between SVORI and non-SVORI samples) were more substantial. As we saw in Exhibit 5, SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report being black (57% versus 50%) and significantly less likely to report being white (31% versus 37%). Exhibit 7 shows the percentages of each group by site who reported that they were white or black. 14 There were considerable variations among sites, however. For example, in Maryland, only 2% of the SVORI respondents were white, whereas in Maine, 69% of the SVORI respondents and 73% of the non-SVORI respondents were white. Overall, where there were statistically significant differences within a state, more SVORI respondents than non-SVORI respondents reported that they were black. This was true for 5 of the 12 sites—Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Oklahoma, and South Carolina. Furthermore, in three sites— Maryland, Missouri, and Oklahoma—the proportion of white SVORI respondents was significantly less than the proportion of white non-SVORI respondents. 14 Respondents were also coded as Hispanic or other/multiracial—see footnote 5. 15 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 7. Race (white or black), by site and group 95% White (SVORI) White (Non-SVORI) Black (SVORI) 44% 31% 39% 24% 30% 25% 27% 45% 49% 39% 37% 39% 19% 20% 20% 11% 9% 5% 2% 24% 26% 36% 23% 20% 55% 60% 59% 52% 56% 54% 52% 19% 35% 34% 32% 25% 40% 66% 70% 66% Black (Non-SVORI) 43% 52% 58% 60% 61% 66% 69% 73% 80% 78% 81% 100% 0% IA IN KS* ME MD** MO** NV OH OK** PA SC* WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site in the proportion of black respondents. **p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site in the proportion of black respondents and in the proportion of white respondents. There was also considerable state-level variation in educational attainment, as can be seen in Exhibit 8. 15 In Iowa, more than 80% of respondents had either finished high school or obtained a GED. Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Kansas also had high rates of high school or GED completion. But in South Carolina, Maryland, and Washington, less than half of the respondents reported that they had a high school degree or GED. In only one state was educational attainment significantly different between SVORI and non-SVORI sample members: in Nevada, significantly more SVORI respondents (79%) than non-SVORI respondents (52%) reported that they had completed 12th grade or earned a GED. 15 16 Respondents could have completed the GED during their current incarceration. The respondents were asked whether they had completed 12th grade or had received a GED at the time of the prerelease interview. Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI 79% 74% 46% 47% 45% 48% 61% 51% 66% 58% MD 52% ME 40% 39% 40% 48% 58% 66% 50% 60% 79% 79% 70% 65% 80% Non-SVORI 65% 100% 84% 89% Exhibit 8. Completed 12th grade or obtained a GED, by site and group SC WA 20% 0% IA IN KS MO NV* OH OK PA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. HOUSING More than 1 in 10 respondents reported that they were primarily homeless, living in a shelter, or had no set place to live during the 6 months prior to incarceration. During the 6 months prior to incarceration, the most common housing situation reported by the respondents was living in a house or apartment that belonged to someone else. Just under half (46%) of both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported primarily living in a house or apartment that belonged to someone else. About one-third (35% SVORI and 32% nonSVORI) reported living primarily in their own house or apartment. Finally, more than 1 in 10 (12%) of both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported as their primary housing situation that they were homeless, living in a shelter, or had no set place to live. FAMILY AND CHILDREN Although about 40% of both groups reported that they were either currently married or in a steady relationship (39% SVORI, 40% non-SVORI), only small proportions reported being married (9% and 10%, SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Of those who reported that they were currently married or in a steady relationship, 59% of SVORI respondents and 67% of non-SVORI respondents said that they lived with that person before incarceration. 17 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation About 60% of respondents reported that they were fathers of minor children. About three-quarters of these fathers reported that they were married or in a steady relationship at the time of the interview. Nearly all fathers required to pay child support reported that they owed back child support. Exhibit 9. Percentages of fathers reporting on child care or child support responsibilities, by group Most study participants from both groups (59% SVORI and 61% non-SVORI) reported having children under age 18. Interestingly, about three-quarters of these fathers reported that they were currently married or in a steady relationship (77% SVORI and 74% non-SVORI). Furthermore, as can be seen in Exhibit 9, about half of those with children under 18 indicated that they had primary care responsibilities for their children (either with or without a partner) during the 6 months prior to incarceration (47% of SVORI respondents and 49% of non-SVORI respondents). Nearly one-third of the fathers (30% SVORI and 32% non-SVORI) reported that they were required to pay child support during the 6 months prior to incarceration, and, of those, more than half reported that they had made the court-ordered payments (59% SVORI and 56% non-SVORI). Nearly all fathers required to pay child support reported that they owed back child support (93% SVORI and 91% nonSVORI), and most of these respondents reported that they owed more than $5,000 (62% and 55%, SVORI and nonSVORI, respectively). As is evident in Exhibit 9, SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were similar on these family background characteristics. 100% 80% 60% 93% 91% SVORI Non-SVORI 59% 56% 47% 49% 40% 30% 32% 20% 0% Primary care for children 3 under 18 Required to pay child 3 support Made required child support b payments Owed back child b support Note: Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not statistically significant at the 0.05 level. a Of those with children under 18 years of age. b Of those required to pay child support. 18 Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Nearly all SVORI and non-SVORI respondents (97% of both groups) reported having people in their lives they considered to be family. Respondents also reported that their family provided an important source of emotional support (data not shown). Nearly all respondents (88% of SVORI and 91% of non-SVORI) agreed or strongly agreed that they felt close to their family and wanted their family to be involved in their life (95% SVORI and 96% non-SVORI). About three-quarters of respondents reported having family members who had been convicted of a crime or incarcerated. Although they provided a substantial source of emotional support for these men, family members also may have served as a negative influence. As shown in Exhibit 10, about threequarters of both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported having family members who had been convicted of a crime or incarcerated, and nearly three-quarters (72% SVORI and 74% non-SVORI) reported having family members who had problems with drugs or alcohol. Exhibit 10. Criminal history and substance use of family and peers, by group SVORI 100% 80% Non-SVORI 75% 76% 75% 74% 72% 74% Family who have been convicted Family who have been incarcerated Family with drug or alcohol problems 83% 83% 81% 81% 82% 83% Friends who have been convicted Friends who have been incarcerated Friends with drug or alcohol problems 60% 40% 20% 0% Note: Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not statistically significant at the 0.05 level. 19 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation A large majority of respondents reported having criminally involved friends prior to incarceration. Similarly, the prevalence of illegal behavior and problems with substance use among friends was also high. A large majority of respondents reported having criminally involved friends prior to incarceration. The majority of both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported having friends prior to incarceration who had been convicted of a crime (83% of both groups) or incarcerated (81% of both groups). The respondents also reported that, prior to incarceration, they had friends who had problems with drugs or alcohol (82% SVORI and 83% nonSVORI). SUBSTANCE USE AND PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH Respondents were asked a variety of questions about their preprison alcohol and drug use, as well as their substance abuse treatment experiences. They were also asked about their lifetime and current experiences with a variety of physical illnesses. In addition, they were asked to respond to a series of items that comprise three well-known scales—the SF-12 physical health scale, the SF-12 mental health scale, and the SA-45 Global Severity Index (GSI) (Ware et al., 2002; Strategic Advantages, 2000). Substance Use and Treatment Nearly all of the respondents reported having used alcohol and drugs during their lifetimes. Self-reports on “ever using” indicate somewhat higher usage among the non-SVORI respondents for most drugs. 20 Nearly all of the respondents reported having used alcohol and drugs during their lifetimes. The majority of both groups reported using alcohol (96% SVORI and 97% non-SVORI), and the average age of first use was about 14 years (13.7 and 13.6 for the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). Similarly, nearly all respondents in both groups reported having used marijuana (92% SVORI and 94% non-SVORI), again reporting a young age of first use (13.9 and 14.1 for the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). Exhibit 11 shows responses for lifetime use for the most common drugs. As can be seen, self-reports on “ever using” indicate somewhat higher usage among the non-SVORI respondents for most drugs. More than half of all respondents reported having used cocaine (53% and 58% of the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively), and nearly one-half reported having used hallucinogens (43% and 49%, SVORI and non-SVORI, Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report respectively). Fewer respondents reported using other substances. 16 Exhibit 11. Lifetime substance use, by group 92% 94% Marijuana 53% 58% Cocaine* 43% Hallucinogens* 49% 26% 30% Amphetamines 25% Tranquilizers* 31% 24% Pain relievers* 30% 18% 23% Heroin* 18% 21% Sedatives 16% 20% Stimulants* SVORI Non-SVORI 15% 16% Inhalants 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. There was considerable variability among the states with respect to self-reports of ever using specific drugs. Exhibit 12 presents the percentages of respondents in each site and group who reported ever using cocaine, heroin, and hallucinogens. Only 22% of the Missouri SVORI respondents reported ever using cocaine in comparison with 82% of the non-SVORI respondents from Maine. Self-reported heroin use ranged from a low of 3% (Missouri SVORI) to a high of 64% (Maine nonSVORI), whereas self-reported hallucinogen use ranged from 21% (Maryland SVORI) to 86% (Maine non-SVORI). 16 Less than 10% reported ever using methadone (6% and 9% for the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively) or anabolic steroids (2% for both the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents). 21 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 12. Lifetime use of cocaine, heroin, and hallucinogens, by site and group Site IA IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA Cocaine NonSVORI SVORI 75% 65% 72% 67% 30%* 62%* 69% 82% 48% 52% 22%* 58%* 36% 50% 34% 50% 55% 54% 49% 59% 56% 53% 66% 60% Heroin NonSVORI SVORI 14% 13% 17% 17% 9% 21% 49% 64% 49% 49% 3%* 26%* 5%* 16%* 11% 13% 7% 12% 12% 17% 7% 9% 38% 23% Hallucinogens NonSVORI SVORI 68% 65% 47% 49% 48% 64% 83% 86% 21%* 36%* 56% 62% 48% 48% 38% 32% 62% 63% 39% 53% 22%* 31%* 76% 63% * p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. In some sites, more nonSVORI than SVORI respondents reported ever using various types of drugs. About two-thirds of respondents reported having used one or more illicit drugs during the 30 days prior to their imprisonment. 22 There were only a few statistically significant differences between SVORI and non-SVORI groups within site; in each case, more non-SVORI than SVORI respondents reported ever using various types of drugs. Specifically, non-SVORI respondents in Kansas and Missouri were much more likely than SVORI respondents in those states to report having used cocaine, and non-SVORI respondents in Missouri and Nevada were more likely than SVORI respondents in those states to report heroin use. Finally, in Maryland and South Carolina, nonSVORI respondents were more likely than SVORI respondents to report hallucinogen use. Respondents were also asked about substance use during the 30 days prior to their current incarceration. About two-thirds of both groups reported having used one or more illicit drugs during the 30 days prior to their imprisonment (66% and 69% for the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). Exhibit 13 shows that there were SVORI/non-SVORI differences among the sites on this measure (differences between groups within site are not statistically significant at the 0.05 level). Reported use ranged from a high of 84% of non-SVORI respondents in Maine to a low of 46% of SVORI respondents in Pennsylvania. Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI 46% 52% 72% 68% 62% 83% 82% 60% 58% 62% 79% 82% 69% KS 60% 58% 68% 65% 68% IN 77% 84% 73% 64% 80% 83% Non-SVORI 100% 74% 76% Exhibit 13. Substance use during the 30 days prior to incarceration, by site and group 40% 20% 0% IA ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. Exhibit 14 compares the two groups’ reported use during the 30 days prior to incarceration for the most commonly reported drugs. More than half of both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported using marijuana; approximately onequarter of all respondents reported using cocaine. Exhibit 14. Use of specific substances during the 30 days prior to incarceration, by group 52% 53% Marijuana 22% 26% Cocaine Amphetamines 13% 14% Pain relievers 11% 14% SVORI Non-SVORI 9% 9% Hallucinogens 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. 23 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation More than half of respondents had received treatment for a substance use or mental health problem at some point during their lifetime. More than half of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents had received treatment for a substance use or mental health problem at some point during their lifetime (56% and 55% of SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Of these, about onequarter had received treatment for alcohol abuse or dependency (25% of SVORI respondents and 28% of nonSVORI respondents), and more than one-third reported that they had received treatment for drug abuse or dependence (42% SVORI and 34% non-SVORI). On average, those who had received treatment had started a treatment program on more than two separate occasions. As shown in Exhibit 15, the percentage of respondents reporting receiving treatment prior to prison varied considerably across sites (but not within). Whereas less than 30% of Nevada respondents reported having previously received treatment for alcohol and other drug (AOD) use, about two-thirds of those in Iowa reported that they had participated in AOD treatment prior to their current incarceration. 100% SVORI Non-SVORI OK 41% 42% 33% 37% OH 36% 28% 51% 50% 34% 32% 21% 28% 40% 44% 36% 33% KS 57% 48% 50% IN 45% 47% 48% 60% 58% 80% 67% 64% Exhibit 15. Any substance use treatment prior to current incarceration, by site and group 20% 0% IA ME MD MO NV PA SC WA Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. 24 Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Physical Health Overall, the study participants reported currently experiencing few physical health problems. Most respondents rated their current physical health as excellent or very good (65% of SVORI and 63% of non-SVORI). The percentages of subjects in each group who reported ever or currently having specific diseases are shown in Exhibits 16 and 17. Overall, the study participants reported currently experiencing few physical health problems. Exhibit 16. Lifetime health problems, by group 20% 19% Asthma 17% 16% High blood pressure 15% 16% Chronic back pain 6% 7% Tuberculosis 5% 5% Heart trouble 5% 6% Arthritis 3% Hepatitis B or C 5% 2% 2% Diabetes SVORI Non-SVORI 1% 1% HIV positive/AIDS 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. Asthma, high blood pressure, and chronic back pain were the most commonly reported. Only 1% of the respondents reported that they were HIV positive or had been diagnosed with AIDS, whereas about 4% reported that they had been diagnosed with hepatitis B or C. There were no statistically significant differences in the reports of physical illnesses between the two groups. 25 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 17. Current health problems, by group 11% 10% Asthma 9% 8% High blood pressure 11% Chronic back pain 13% 0% Tuberculosis 0% 3% 3% Heart trouble 5% 5% Arthritis 3% Hepatitis B or C* 5% SVORI 1% 2% Diabetes Non-SVORI 1% 1% HIV positive/AIDS 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Note: Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. Mental Health There were no differences between SVORI and nonSVORI respondents in their general measures of physical and mental functioning and mental health. 26 There were also no differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents in their scores on the four scales measuring physical and mental functioning (the SF-12 scales) and mental health (the SA-45 GSI and Positive Symptom Total [PST]). Scores on the SF-12 physical health scale were above 50 (53.63 for SVORI respondents, 53.34 for non-SVORI respondents). Furthermore, more than half of each group responded that they had no limitations with respect to each of the five items that constitute the physical health scale (59% of SVORI respondents and 56% of non-SVORI respondents). Scores on the SF-12 mental health scale were nearly 50 (48.93 for SVORI respondents, 48.51 for non-SVORI respondents). Both groups scored less than 70 on the GSI, which has a range of 45 to 225; higher scores indicate more psychopathology (66.64 and 68.09 for the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). Average scores on the PST index were 13 for both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, meaning that Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report respondents reported experiencing, on average, 13 of the 45 symptoms included in the SA-45 during the 7 days prior to the interview. Non-SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than SVORI respondents to indicate symptoms of hostility and psychoticism. Exhibit 18. Average scores on Brief Symptom Inventory subscales, by group In addition to the GSI, the SA-45 includes subscales indicating symptoms of specific psychopathologies. Of the nine subscales, there were statistically significant differences for two measures—in each case indicating that the non-SVORI respondents were slightly worse on these measures than the SVORI respondents. Results are shown in Exhibit 18. Scores on these subscales could range from a low of 5 to a high of 25, and all results were on the lower end of the range. Scores were similar between groups for anxiety, depression, interpersonal sensitivity, obsessive-compulsive disorder, paranoid ideation, phobic anxiety, and somatization. Non-SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than SVORI respondents to indicate symptoms of hostility (6.41 for SVORI respondents, 6.69 for non-SVORI respondents) and psychoticism (6.58 for SVORI respondents, 6.89 for non-SVORI respondents). Measure Anxiety scale Depression scale Hostility scale* Interpersonal sensitivity scale Obsessive-compulsive scale Paranoid ideation scale Phobic anxiety scale Psychoticism scale* Somatization scale SVORI 7.42 8.31 6.41 7.50 8.12 8.84 6.42 6.58 7.05 Non-SVORI 7.67 8.45 6.69 7.60 8.17 8.85 6.56 6.89 7.16 *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Depression was cited as the most common reason for the treatment. As reported previously, more than half of SVORI and nonSVORI respondents had received treatment for a substance use or mental health problem at some point during their lifetime (56% and 55% of SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Of those who reported that they had ever received mental health treatment, depression was cited as the most common reason for the treatment. About 20% of each group reported that they had received care for depression or dysthymia (19% SVORI and 20% non-SVORI). Ten percent or more reported that they had received treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (12% of SVORI respondents and 13% of non-SVORI 27 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation respondents) or bipolar disorder (10% SVORI and 12% nonSVORI). Less than 10% reported that they were currently receiving treatment for any mental health problem. Of those who reported that they were currently receiving treatment, the most common diagnoses were depression or dysthymia (6% and 10%, SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively) and bipolar disorder (5% and 6%, SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Most respondents described their mental health status at the time of the pre-release interview as excellent or very good. Most respondents described their mental health status at the time of the pre-release interview as excellent or very good (52% SVORI and 49% non-SVORI). During their current period of incarceration, 13% of SVORI respondents were prescribed medication for emotional problems, and 22% felt they needed treatment for mental health problems. The non-SVORI respondents were significantly more likely to have been prescribed medication for a mental or emotional problem while incarcerated (19%) and to feel in need of treatment for mental health problems (29%). EMPLOYMENT HISTORY AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT This subsection covers the respondents’ employment history prior to incarceration and describes additional sources of financial support. Employment History Most subjects reported having worked at some time prior to incarceration. 28 As shown in Exhibit 19, most subjects reported having worked at some time prior to incarceration—89% of SVORI versus 92% of non-SVORI—and about two-thirds of both groups reported having a job during the 6 months prior to incarceration (64% and 68%, SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Although these differences are statistically significant (at 0.05 levels), they are relatively small in magnitude. Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 19. Employment prior to incarceration, by group 100% 89% SVORI 92% Non-SVORI 80% 64% 68% 60% 40% 20% 0% Ever held job* Held job in 6 months before prison* *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Some variation in the percentage of respondents who had worked during the 6 months prior to entering prison was evident across the 12 sites (Exhibit 20). More than 70% of SVORI respondents in Iowa, Maine, and South Carolina reported working during the 6 months prior to their incarceration. In contrast, only about 40% of all respondents in Washington reported working immediately prior to incarceration. Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were not statistically significant at the 0.05 level in any state. 29 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation SVORI 72% 73% 63% 63% 71% 57% 38% 44% 47% 66% 64% 68% 56% 57% 67% 72% 74% 70% 48% 60% 67% 67% 80% Non-SVORI 81% 82% 100% 72% Exhibit 20. Employment during the 6 months prior to incarceration, by site and group 40% 20% 0% IA IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. For those who worked during the 6 months prior to incarceration, about three-quarters of respondents described their most recent job as a permanent job (75% SVORI and 73% non-SVORI) for which they received formal pay (Exhibit 21). Exhibit 21. Characteristics of respondents’ jobs prior to incarceration, by groupa SVORI 100% 80% 93% Non-SVORI 75% 73% 74% 94% 72% 60% 40% 20% 0% Held a permanent Worked for formal Worked more than job pay 20 hrs/wk Note: Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. a Among respondents who worked during the 6 months prior to incarceration. 30 Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Almost all who worked reported that they had worked more than 20 hours a week, working an average of about 42 hours (41.7 hours per week for SVORI respondents and 41.8 hours per week for non-SVORI respondents). The SVORI respondents reported a slightly higher average hourly rate of $10.91 compared with the average $10.13 reported by the non-SVORI respondents. When asked about the longest they had ever worked at one job since they were 18, most respondents reported less than 2 years. Although the majority described their most recent job as a permanent job, many of the respondents who had worked reported having had more than one job during the 6 months prior to incarceration. More than one-third of the sample (35% SVORI, 36% non-SVORI) reported having had two or more jobs during the 6 months prior to incarceration. Furthermore, well over one-third (35% SVORI, 38% non-SVORI) reported that they worked at the job for 3 months or less. When asked about the longest they had ever worked at one job since they were 18, most respondents reported less than 2 years (61% SVORI, 62% non-SVORI). The jobs that respondents typically held were blue-collar jobs. More than one-third of the respondents in both groups who had been employed during the 6 months prior to incarceration reported that the last job they had was as a laborer, which includes construction workers, day laborers, landscapers, and roofers (35% SVORI, 36% non-SVORI). About one-fifth of respondents (22% of each group) had worked in the service industry as cooks, waiters, janitors, cashiers, and dishwashers. Many respondents also reported working as skilled craftsmen (15% SVORI, 17% non-SVORI) or equipment operators (16% SVORI, 13% non-SVORI). Few respondents reported having professional or technical occupations or jobs as managers or administrators (4% of each group). Financial Support Nearly half of the respondents reported supporting themselves with income from illegal activities during the 6 months prior to incarceration. The respondents were asked how they had supported themselves, in addition to legal employment, during the 6 months prior to incarceration. Nearly half of the respondents reported supporting themselves with income from illegal activities (45% and 43% of SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Another one-third received support from family (32% and 31% of SVORI and non-SVORI, respectively). Fewer reported receiving financial help from friends (16% of SVORI respondents, 14% of non-SVORI respondents) or the 31 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation government (11% of SVORI respondents, 10% of non-SVORI respondents). Exhibit 22 shows the sources of financial support for SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, disaggregated by their employment status during the 6 months prior to incarceration. As shown in the exhibit, within employment status there were relatively few differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents with respect to whether they reported receiving financial support from each of the four sources. Exhibit 22. Sources of income during the 6 months prior to incarceration, by employment status and group 100% Held job (SVORI) Held job (Non-SVORI) 63% No job (Non-SVORI) 63% No job (SVORI) 80% 14% 6% 3% 19% 34% 35% 14% 8% 8% 16% 18% 20% 20% 12% 14% 32% 34% 31% 40% 31% 60% 0% Family Friends Government Illegal Other* *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI (Held Job) and non-SVORI (Held Job). The most substantial difference between the reports of those working and not working was in reports of support from illegal activities. More than 60% of those who were not employed during the 6 months prior to incarceration reported financial support from illegal activities, compared with less than 40% of those who reported working during that period. For both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, those who held a job prior to incarceration were somewhat less likely than those who had no job to receive financial support from friends, the government, or other sources. 32 Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report CRIMINAL HISTORY, VIOLENCE, VICTIMIZATION, AND GANG INVOLVEMENT This subsection describes respondents’ involvement with the criminal and juvenile justice systems prior to incarceration and outlines pre-incarceration perpetration of violence and victimization. We also briefly describe respondents’ involvement as gang members. Criminal History Respondents reported considerable involvement with the criminal justice system prior to their current incarceration. Exhibit 23. Criminal history of respondents, by group SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported considerable involvement with the criminal justice system prior to their current incarceration (Exhibit 23). On average, the respondents were 16 years old at the time of their first arrest and had been arrested more than 12 times. In addition to their current term of incarceration, most respondents had served a previous prison term, with the non-SVORI group being significantly more likely to report a prior prison term (83% of SVORI, 87% of nonSVORI). Also, the non-SVORI respondents reported significantly more incarcerations, on average, than the SVORI group (1.20 for SVORI, 1.47 for non-SVORI). Criminal History Age at first arrest (mean) Times arrested (mean) Times convicted (mean) Ever been previously incarcerated* Times previously incarcerated (mean)* SVORI 15.92 12.42 5.48 83% 1.20 Non-SVORI 16.03 13.14 5.70 87% 1.47 *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. The two groups were similar in self-reported juvenile detentions. Overall, about half (51% and 49% of the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively) reported that they had spent time in a juvenile correctional facility for committing a crime. Of those who reported a juvenile detention, they had been detained, on average, 3.5 times (3.58 times for SVORI, 3.49 times for non-SVORI). 33 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation About 40% of respondents reported that they were currently serving time for a violent crime. Exhibit 24. Conviction offenses for current incarceration, by group Exhibit 24 shows the conviction offense(s) that were reported by the respondents. 17 About 40% of respondents reported that they were currently serving time for a person/violent crime (42% SVORI and 40% non-SVORI). About 25% reported a property crime (24% and 27% of the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that their current incarceration was for a drug crime (36% SVORI, 31% non-SVORI) and significantly less likely to report that their current incarceration was for a public order crime (17% SVORI, 22% non-SVORI). Public order offenses include probation and parole violations; members of the non-SVORI group were more likely to report that their current incarceration was for a violation of probation or parole (27% and 35% of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). 40% Person/Violent 42% 27% Property 24% 31% Drug* 36% Non-SVORI 22% Public order* SVORI 17% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. 17 34 Two percent of the SVORI and 1% of the non-SVORI respondents reported that their conviction offense was “other.” This category includes unspecified felonies, gang activity, and habitual offender violations. Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report More than two-thirds of respondents reported violent behavior prior to incarceration. Most also reported being victims of violence. Perpetration of Violence During the 6 months prior to incarceration, more than twothirds of both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents (69% and 67%, respectively) reported violent behavior (including threats of violence). Victimization Most respondents also reported being victims of violence. More than half of the respondents (59% SVORI and 58% non-SVORI) reported being victimized either through threats or use of violence during the 6 months prior to incarceration. Gang Membership Very few respondents in both groups (5% of SVORI and 6% of non-SVORI) reported being a member of a gang. Of the small number of respondents in a gang, about half (53% of SVORI, 52% of non-SVORI) considered their gang to be family. IN-PRISON EXPERIENCES This subsection describes respondents’ in-prison experiences on several dimensions, including sentence length, disciplinary infractions, and in-prison victimization. This is followed by a description of in-prison work and a discussion of interaction with family during prison. Sentence Length SVORI respondents had been incarcerated significantly longer than non-SVORI respondents. At the time of the pre-release interview, SVORI respondents had been incarcerated significantly longer than non-SVORI respondents (an average of 2.8 years and 2.3 years, respectively). The difference between these is due, primarily, to statistically significant differences in 5 of the 12 sites, as can be seen in Exhibit 25. In particular, in Kansas, Missouri, Nevada, and Oklahoma, SVORI respondents had served, on average, about 2 years longer than the non-SVORI respondents. In Washington, SVORI respondents had been incarcerated for 1 year longer than non-SVORI respondents, on average. Respondents in Maine reported the shortest lengths of stay of slightly more than a year, whereas stays of about 2 years were reported by most respondents in the remainder of sites, without statistically significant differences in length of stay. 35 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 25. Average duration of incarceration at time of interview, by site and group SVORI 4.6 5 3.8 2.6 3.1 2.7 1.5 2.3 2.1 2.3 2.6 2.1 1.3 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.0 2.2 2 2.1 1.9 Years 3 1.7 3.7 3.4 4 3.9 3.9 Non-SVORI 1 0 IA IN KS* ME MD MO* NV* OH OK* PA SC WA* *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. Disciplinary Infractions and Administrative Segregations SVORI respondents also reported more disciplinary infractions and administrative segregations than were reported by the non-SVORI respondents. As shown in Exhibit 26, 64% of SVORI respondents reported at least one disciplinary infraction, compared with 57% of non-SVORI respondents. Fewer respondents reported administrative segregation during the current term of incarceration. These differences, although statistically significant, are small and may simply reflect the longer lengths of stay reported by the SVORI respondents. 18 18 36 Longer lengths of stay expose subjects to greater opportunity to commit infractions and receive administrative segregation; in other words, the period at risk is longer. Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 26. Disciplinary infractions and administrative segregations during current incarceration, by group Infractions and Segregations Disciplinary Infractions None One More than one Administrative Segregations None One More than one SVORI Non-SVORI 35% 17% 47% 43% 17% 40% 55% 19% 26% 60% 18% 22% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. In-Prison Victimization Slightly more than half of all respondents reported being victimized during the current incarceration. Slightly more than half of all respondents (55% and 54% of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively) reported being victimized during the current incarceration. This measure includes both threat of violence (including someone threatening to hit the respondent with a fist or anything else that could hurt him or someone threatening to use a weapon on him) and perpetration of violence (including someone throwing anything at the respondent; pushing, grabbing, shoving, slapping, kicking, biting, hitting with a fist, or using a weapon on him; or the respondent needing medical attention for violent acts directed at him). The reported severity of victimization was low. On a 36-point victimization scale, SVORI and non-SVORI respondents scored an average of 2.7 and 2.9, respectively. 19 In-Prison Work Nearly two-thirds of the respondents said that they had a job in the institution where they were incarcerated. Nearly two-thirds of the respondents (63% of SVORI and 61% of non-SVORI) said that they had a job in the institution where they were incarcerated. On average, respondents with prison jobs spent about 23 hours per week working (23.8 and 22.3 hours for SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). As can be seen in Exhibit 27, respondents in South Carolina and Pennsylvania were most likely to report working, and those in 19 Responses to six victimization items were coded 0 though 6, with higher values indicating more frequent victimization. (Response options ranged from “never” to “daily.”) The six items were summed to create the in-prison victimization scale. 37 SVORI 100% 81% 82% 48% 40% 62% 69% 66% 58% 69% 52% 23% 30% 29% 40% 52% 44% 64% 54% 60% 56% 80% 65% 69% Non-SVORI 71% 75% Exhibit 27. Institutional employment, by site and group 90% 83% Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation 20% 0% IA IN* KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Nevada were the least likely. A significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents was observed only for Indiana (56% and 29%, respectively). Very few respondents reported having a workrelease job. Very few respondents reported having a work-release job. Only 3% of SVORI and 4% of non-SVORI respondents reported that they were on work release. Those with work-release jobs reported working more hours than those with institution jobs. SVORI respondents reported working significantly more hours than non-SVORI respondents (39.4 and 31.0 hours, respectively). As shown in Exhibit 28, only in Pennsylvania did more than 10% of the respondents participate in work release. 20 For the remaining states, less than 10% (and usually many fewer) reported having a work-release job. Family Most respondents indicated that family members served as an important source of emotional support during incarceration. Most respondents (97% of both groups) indicated that they had people in their lives that they considered to be family and that these family members served as an important source of emotional support. A scale was created to represent the degree of family emotional support that respondents felt at the time of the pre-release interview. Respondents were asked the degree to which they agreed with 10 statements about their 20 38 Most respondents in Pennsylvania were interviewed at a community corrections center, where work-release jobs were common. Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report relationships with their family, such as “I have someone in my family who understands my problems” and “I have someone in my family to love me and make me feel wanted.”21 The items were combined to create a scale with possible values ranging from 0 to 30 and higher scores indicating higher levels of family emotional support. There were no significant differences between SVORI respondents and non-SVORI respondents on this measure (21.63 for SVORI, 21.35 for non-SVORI). Exhibit 28. Work-release participation, by site and group 29% 35% SVORI 30% Non-SVORI 25% 16% 20% MO OH OK PA SC 3% NV 0% 2% 2% 2% 6% MD 2% 0% ME 3% 5% 2% 4% IA* 0% 2% 0% 0% 5% 6% 5% 10% 8% 15% WA Note: Values for IN and KS were 0%. *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. Respondents were also asked about the frequency of contact with family members and friends. Response options for each type of contact ranged from “never” to “daily.” SVORI and nonSVORI respondents reported similar frequencies of contact with their family members through phone calls or mail (Exhibit 29). About 40% of both groups reported weekly phone or mail contact with family members. Both SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported less frequent phone and mail contact with friends. In-prison visits with family members were less frequent than phone calls and mail. However, on average, SVORI 21 Response categories were “strongly agree,” “agree,” “disagree,” and “strongly disagree.” Values of 0 through 3 were assigned to response categories, with higher values representing greater family emotional support. The values for each of the 10 items were summed to create the family emotional support scale. 39 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation respondents received more visits from family members and non-family members than the comparison group. Exhibit 29. Frequency of in-prison contact with family members and friends, by group Form of Contact Phone Contact Never A few times Monthly Weekly Daily Mail Contact Never A few times Monthly Weekly Daily In-Person Visits Never A few times Monthly Weekly Daily Contact with Family Members SVORI Non-SVORI Contact with Friends SVORI Non-SVORI 16% 15% 16% 38% 14% 18% 14% 16% 36% 16% 47% 16% 13% 16% 8% 52% 13% 11% 15% 9% 10% 17% 23% 41% 9% 9% 18% 21% 41% 10% 30% 19% 16% 30% 6% 36% 17% 16% 25% 6% 35%* 23% 17% 21% 3% 43%* 21% 18% 17% 2% 64% 16% 8% 10% 2% 71% 13% 6% 8% 1% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Respondents were also asked whether the amount of each type of contact with family and friends was currently more, about the same, or less than when they were first incarcerated (i.e., during the first 6 months of incarceration). Almost half of the respondents in both groups reported that they had about the same amount of contact with family and friends as they did when they were first incarcerated (Exhibit 30). More respondents reported having less contact, rather than more contact, with family and friends than when they were first incarcerated. 40 Respondent Characteristics — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 30. Amount of contact with family members and friends at time of interview compared with contact when first incarcerated More contact (SVORI) 100% More contact (Non-SVORI) About the same (SVORI) 80% About the same (Non-SVORI) 26% 30% 54% 16% 20% 35% 36% 48% 17% 17% 32% 34% 46% 46% 21% 20% 40% 20% 47% Less contact (Non-SVORI) 60% 55% Less contact (SVORI) 0% Phone contact Mail contact In-person visits Note: Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. 41 Service Needs It is well documented that most prisoners face a substantial number of deficits (Travis and Visher, 2005; Petersilia, 2003). The pre-release interviews provided an opportunity for the respondents to identify the extent to which they needed a wide range of specific services. 22 We asked questions about 28 different types of services and then grouped them into five service categories or “bundles.” These bundles are services to help with the transition from prison to the community; health care services (including substance abuse and mental health); employment, education, and skills services; domestic violence–related services; and child-related services. Analogous to service bundle scores developed with the program director data (see page 11 and Exhibit 4), we developed service need bundle scores from the prisoner interview data to summarize needs in the domains of transitional, health, employment/education/skills, domestic violence, and child services. We generated these scores for each individual by summing zero/one indicators for whether the individual did not/did report needing each of the items within a bundle; we then divided this sum by the number of items in the bundle. (These items are listed by bundle in Exhibit A-3 in Appendix A and presented bundle by bundle in the subsections below.) At the individual respondent level, this bundle score can be 22 Responses were “a lot,” “a little,” or “not at all.” These were subsequently recoded to “some” and “not at all.” 43 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation interpreted as the proportion of the bundle that the individual reported needing. 23 SERVICE NEED BUNDLE SCORES This subsection reviews the bundle scores for all SVORI and non-SVORI respondents and then examines cross-site variation for the individual service bundles. The levels of expressed need for employment, education, and skills were very high. Exhibit 31 compares the service need bundle scores for all SVORI and non-SVORI respondents. As can be seen, the levels of expressed need for employment, education, and skills were very high—on average, respondents reported needing nearly three-quarters of all of the service items in the employment bundle (average bundle scores of 75 for SVORI and 74 for nonSVORI). Respondents also expressed a high level of need for the services and assistance contained in the transitional services bundle. On average, respondents reported needing nearly two-thirds of these services, which include financial assistance, transportation, and obtaining a driver’s license and other documentation (average scores of 64 for SVORI and 62 for non-SVORI). Exhibit 31. Service need bundle scores across service bundles, by group Employment/education/life skills services 75 74 64 62 Transitional services 46 48 a Child servicesa 31 34 Health services* SVORI 7 8 Domestic violence services 0 Non-SVORI 20 40 60 80 100 a Among those who reported having minor children. *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. 23 44 Program-level bundle scores of service delivery were developed using reports from SVORI program directors, as shown in Exhibit 4 (see Winterfield et al., 2006). Data from the pre-release interview were used to develop individual-level bundle scores for each respondent. Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Respondents with children also reported needing, on average, about half of the services included in the child-related services bundle (46% for SVORI, 48% for non-SVORI). On average, SVORI respondents reported needing fewer health services than the non-SVORI respondents (31% for SVORI, 34% for nonSVORI). Relatively few respondents felt the need for domestic violence services. The following subsections provide additional information on the individual bundles, including differences among sites and groups with respect to specific needs. TRANSITIONAL SERVICES Prior to release, nearly all SVORI and non-SVORI respondents (99% of both groups) reported needing at least some transitional services to address immediate needs upon release, such as financial, public, or legal assistance; a place to live; various identification documents; transportation; health insurance; and access to emergency resources, such as clothing and food. Exhibit 32 displays the percentages of respondents who reported needing these types of services. Overall, nearly half or more of all respondents reported needing each of these transitional services. Exhibit 32. Self-reported need for specific transitional services, by group 86% 82% 83% 81% 75% 73% 72% 71% Financial assistance* Driver's license Public health care insurance Transportation 60% 55% 60% 61% 55% 56% 52% 54% 49% 46% 45% 48% Access to clothing/food* Mentor Documents for employment Public financial assistance Place to live Legal assistance 0% 25% 50% SVORI Non-SVORI 75% 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. 45 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation General financial assistance was the most commonly reported transitional need. Several of these immediate and basic needs were related to financial assistance. Indeed, general financial assistance was the most commonly reported transitional need (86% of SVORI respondents, 82% of non-SVORI respondents), and more than half reported that they needed financial assistance from the government (52% SVORI, 54% non-SVORI). More than threequarters reported needing health care insurance. There were substantial proportions reporting needing basic services, including housing and access to clothing and food. Approximately 30 days prior to release, nearly half of all respondents reported needing a place to live after release (49% of SVORI respondents, 46% of non-SVORI respondents). SVORI respondents were more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that they needed access to clothing and food at release (60% SVORI, 55% non-SVORI). The need for a driver’s license was the second highest transitional need reported. The need for a driver’s license was the second highest transitional need reported (83% of SVORI respondents, 81% of non-SVORI respondents). In addition, more than half of all respondents reported needing other identification documents necessary for obtaining employment and securing public benefits, such as a birth certificate, Social Security card, and photo identification card (55% SVORI, 56% non-SVORI). Transportation was also reported as another critical and immediate need for offenders returning to the community (72% SVORI, 71% non-SVORI) in order to get to one’s housing unit, make appointments in the community to obtain services and identification documents, apply for benefits, or interview for jobs. The other two items included in this set of services are the need for a mentor and the need for legal assistance. More than 60% of respondents indicated that they needed a mentor (60% SVORI, 61% non-SVORI). Almost half of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents also reported needing legal assistance of some kind (45% SVORI, 48% non-SVORI). As explained above, the service need bundle score at the individual respondent level can be interpreted as the proportion of services in the bundle that the individual reported needing. Respondents generally expressed a high level of need for the services and assistance included in the transitional services bundle, with average bundle scores of 64 for SVORI respondents and 62 for non-SVORI respondents. 46 Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Averaging these bundle scores for SVORI and non-SVORI respondents in each site provides a measure of the average proportion of services in the bundle that respondents in a site reported needing. Thus, these bundle scores provide a convenient means for assessing and comparing across the sites the levels of need expressed by respondents. Exhibit 33 shows the transitional services bundle scores by group and site. As can be seen, there is variability among the sites on this measure. Exhibit 33. Average service need bundle scores for the transitional services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 75 67 67 60 57 67 66 65 63 60 66 60 74 72 69 68 64 65 63 58 55 65 62 57 55 40 20 0 IA IN KS ME* MD MO NV OH OK* PA SC WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. The scores range from a low of 55 for the non-SVORI respondents in Maine and Nevada to a high of 75 for the nonSVORI respondents in Ohio. Because this bundle includes 10 items, the groups at the lower end of the range reported needing, on average, about 5.5 of these 10 transitional services; at the upper end, they reported needing about 7.5 of the 10 services. The within-site difference between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents in their need for transitional services 47 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation was statistically significant in two sites: Maine and Oklahoma. In both cases, SVORI respondents reported a greater number of needs than non-SVORI respondents. HEALTH SERVICES The majority of respondents reported needing some health services. Exhibit 34. Self-reported need for specific health services, by group Respondents’ perceived needs regarding health services are shown in Exhibit 34. The majority of both SVORI (79%) and non-SVORI (80%) respondents reported needing some kind of health services. More than half of both groups (56% of SVORI respondents, 57% of non-SVORI respondents) reported needing medical treatment. 56% 57% Medical treatment 37% 43% AOD treatment* 36% 38% Anger management program 22% 29% Mental health treatment* SVORI 4% 4% Support group for abuse victims 0% Non-SVORI 25% 50% 75% 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. More than one-third of both groups reported needing AOD treatment, with reported need significantly higher among the non-SVORI respondents (37% SVORI, 43% non-SVORI). The non-SVORI group was also significantly more likely to report needing mental health treatment than were SVORI respondents (22% SVORI, 29% non-SVORI). More than one-third of respondents (36% of SVORI, 38% of non-SVORI) reported needing an anger management program. Very few of the respondents reported needing a support group for victims of abuse (4% of both groups). Looking again at the bundle scores for this category (see Exhibit 31), respondents generally reported needing about onethird of the health services, with SVORI respondents needing a 48 Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report smaller proportion of services in the bundle (average bundle scores of 31 for SVORI respondents and 34 for non-SVORI respondents). The difference was driven primarily by higher reports of need for mental health and substance abuse treatment services by the non-SVORI respondents (as shown in Exhibit 34). Exhibit 35, the health services need bundle scores by group and site, shows some variability among the groups. Exhibit 35. Average service need bundle scores for the health services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 50 37 40 38 37 32 29 35 38 32 36 32 33 26 35 29 33 28 34 29 31 36 34 32 28 20 0 IA* IN KS ME MD MO* NV OH OK PA SC WA* *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. Seventeen of the 24 groups needed, on average, about onethird of the health services in the bundle. Bundle scores ranged from 26 for Missouri SVORI respondents to 50 for Washington SVORI respondents. In three states, the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents reported significantly different levels of need for health services. The Iowa SVORI respondents reported significantly lower need scores than their non-SVORI counterparts (29 for SVORI, 37 for non-SVORI). Similar levels 49 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation of need were reported in Missouri, where SVORI respondents reported less overall need than non-SVORI respondents (average scores of 26 for SVORI, 36 for non-SVORI). In contrast, in Washington, SVORI respondents reported higher levels of health services need than non-SVORI respondents (average scores of 50 for SVORI and 36 for non-SVORI). EMPLOYMENT/EDUCATION/SKILLS SERVICES Nearly all respondents reported needing some kind of employment, education, or skills– related services to prepare them for release. Exhibit 36. Self-reported need for specific employment, education, and skills services, by group Although most members of both groups had previous employment experience, nearly all respondents (99%) reported needing some kind of employment, education, or skills–related services to prepare them for their return to the community. As shown in Exhibit 36, most SVORI respondents (80%) reported needing a job after release—slightly more than nonSVORI respondents (76%). SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report needing job training (82% SVORI, 76% non-SVORI). These differences may be due to SVORI program participation heightening the participants’ awareness of the need for employment services. 94% 92% More education 82% 76% Job training* 80% 76% Job 75% 73% Life skills 71% 68% Money management skills 64% 69% Change criminal attitudes* 64% 64% Work on personal relationships 0% 25% 50% 75% SVORI Non-SVORI 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. 50 Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Almost all SVORI (94%) and non-SVORI (92%) respondents reported that they needed additional education. Three-quarters of both groups (75% SVORI, 73% non-SVORI) reported needing to learn life skills, and almost as many (71% SVORI, 68% non-SVORI) reported needing money management skills. The majority of respondents recognized that some aspect of their own behavior needed to change to improve their lives after release. The majority of respondents recognized that some aspect of their own behavior needed to change to improve their lives after release. About two-thirds (64% of SVORI respondents, 69% of non-SVORI respondents) reported that they needed to change their attitudes related to criminal behavior. In addition, almost two-thirds (64% of both groups) reported needing to work on their personal relationships. As explained above (see discussion of Exhibit 31), the service need bundle scores for the employment/education/skills bundle are very high—on average, respondents reported needing about three-quarters of all of the seven service items in the employment bundle (average scores of 75 for SVORI and 74 for non-SVORI). Exhibit 37 shows the employment/education/skills services need bundle scores by site and group. As can be seen, the scores ranged from a low of 64 for Pennsylvania SVORI respondents to a high of 83 for Washington SVORI respondents, suggesting greater levels of need among the Washington respondents. This can be interpreted to mean that, on average, the Pennsylvania SVORI respondents reported needing about four and a half of the services, whereas the Washington SVORI respondents reported needing almost six of the seven services. Within each site, there were no statistically significant differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents. 51 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 37. Average service need bundle scores for the employment/education/skills services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 77 77 83 81 79 74 76 77 76 75 67 69 77 75 78 79 77 79 74 75 74 70 68 64 60 40 20 0 IA IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES Very few respondents reported needing domestic violence services. Respondents were asked about their need for two types of domestic violence services—batterer intervention programs and domestic violence support groups—which were combined into a domestic violence services bundle. Very few respondents reported needing these services—about 10% of the respondents reported needing either of these two types of programming. Only 8% of each group reported needing a batterer intervention program. The SVORI respondents were significantly less likely than the non-SVORI respondents to report needing a domestic violence support group (6% SVORI, 9% non-SVORI). Exhibit 38 shows the bundle scores by site and group for domestic violence services. Domestic violence services bundle scores were extremely low (3 to 14), reflecting the very small fraction of subjects who reported needing either of the two 52 Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report services included in this bundle. None of the SVORI/non-SVORI differences were statistically significant. Exhibit 38. Average service need bundle scores for the domestic violence services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 40 20 4 6 9 9 9 9 9 4 3 14 12 9 8 3 5 5 5 8 9 10 8 4 10 5 0 IA IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. CHILD SERVICES Respondents who had minor children (slightly more than 60% of respondents) were asked about their need for support with their children, and these items were assigned to the child services bundle. A majority of fathers reported needing some kind of child-related service. A majority of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents had minor children, and about half of those with minor children were involved in primary care responsibilities (either alone or with a partner) before being incarcerated. Most SVORI (83%) and non-SVORI fathers (85%) reported needing some kind of childrelated service. As shown in Exhibit 39, among the 995 fathers with minor children, more than half (60% SVORI, 63% nonSVORI) reported needing help developing parenting skills, and 53 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation about two-fifths (39% for both SVORI and non-SVORI) reported that they would need child care assistance after release. Nearly half of SVORI (45%) and non-SVORI (48%) fathers with minor children reported needing to make child support payments for their children. Finally, almost all (88% SVORI, 86% nonSVORI) of the fathers who owed back child support reported needing modifications in their child support debt. Exhibit 39. Self-reported need for specific child services, by group 60% Parenting skills 63% 39% 39% Child care (when released) 35% M odification of custody 38% SVORI 45% 48% Child support payments Non-SVORI 88% Modification in child support debt* 86% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% * Of those who owed back child support. On average, parents reported needing about half of the services included in the child services bundle (average scores of 46 for SVORI and 48 for non-SVORI). Exhibit 40 shows the child services bundle scores by site and group. As can be seen, there is some variability among the groups, and, with the exception of the domestic violence bundle scores, the child services bundle scores reflect a lower level of expressed need than that of the previously discussed bundles. Child services bundle scores ranged from 36 for Ohio SVORI respondents to 59 for Iowa non-SVORI respondents. In addition, Iowa SVORI respondents reported less need for child services than their non-SVORI counterparts (average scores of 44 for SVORI and 59 for non-SVORI). 54 Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 40. Average service need bundle scores for the child services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 59 60 59 55 49 55 57 48 49 52 50 47 44 39 40 37 55 55 52 49 49 49 44 44 40 36 20 0 IA* IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. LEVELS OF NEED ACROSS SERVICES SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were similar on most measures and reported high need across the spectrum of services. SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were similar on most measures and reported high need across the spectrum of services (see Exhibit A-3 in Appendix A). Specifically, as shown in Exhibit 41, most SVORI respondents commonly reported needing more education (94%), financial assistance (86%), a driver’s license (83%), job training (82%), and a job (80%). Three-quarters (75%) also reported needing public health care insurance and life skills training. Of those services, non-SVORI respondents were significantly less likely than SVORI respondents to report needing financial assistance or job training. 24 24 SVORI respondents may be more likely to report needing services than non-SVORI respondents because of extensive needs assessments they may have received as part of their participation in SVORI, which may have increased awareness of need. 55 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 41. Most commonly reported service needs, by group 94% 92% Education 86% 82% Financial assistance* Driver's license 83% 81% Job training* 82% 76% 80% 76% Job Public health care insurance 75% 73% Life skills 75% 73% SVORI Non-SVORI 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. When asked for their top two service needs, more than onethird of respondents mentioned needing a job after release (38% SVORI, 36% non-SVORI). About one-quarter (24% SVORI, 25% non-SVORI) listed needing a driver’s license as one of their top two needs. The next four needs mentioned by the most respondents as one of their top two included more education (18% of both groups), job training (17% SVORI, 14% non-SVORI), financial assistance (15% SVORI, 16% nonSVORI), and a place to live when released (15% SVORI, 16% non-SVORI). Respondents reported needing more than half of all the service items. In addition to the service bundles described in the above subsections, we also created an “all services” bundle, which captures the level of overall need across all services (individual items are in Exhibit A-3). On average, the respondents reported needing more than half of all the service items (average score of 55 for both SVORI and non-SVORI). There is relatively little variability across the sites in terms of the overall service bundle scores, as can be seen in Exhibit 42. The modal score across the 24 group-site pairs was 52, which was generated for 4 of the 24 groups, and the median was 55. In general, the groups reported needing 50% to 60% of all of the service items. None of the within-site differences between the SVORI and non-SVORI groups was significant at the 0.05 level. 56 Service Needs — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 42. Average service need bundle scores for all services, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 66 60 56 59 57 61 58 57 53 52 55 50 56 57 52 53 53 55 60 59 52 52 54 54 55 40 20 0 IA IN KS ME MD MO NV OH OK PA SC WA Note: Within-site differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are not significant at the 0.05 level. 57 Service Receipt The previous section demonstrated the high levels of expressed need for a wide variety of services—particularly those services that are critical to moving from prison to the community, including those associated with basic transitional needs (e.g., housing, transportation, and employment). The SVORI programs were intended to increase access to the services and programs that address these and other needs. In the Introduction, we presented information from the 2005 survey of SVORI program directors that suggested that their programs were providing a variety of services to SVORI program participants, particularly in the transitional and employment/education/skills domains. In this section, we present results from the pre-release interviews that provide another insight into the delivery of services and programs for our incarcerated respondents. These interviews were conducted between July 2004 and November 2005 so individuals would have received pre-release services and programming during the first 1 to 2 years of SVORI program development and implementation. Service receipt bundle scores were calculated analogous to the calculations of the service need bundle scores: the number of “yes” responses to items in a bundle was divided by the number of bundle items and multiplied by 100. Individual bundle scores were averaged to get site-level scores, which were averaged to get overall scores. Child services receipt bundle scores were generated only for those respondents who reported having children under the age of 18. In addition to the bundles introduced when we discussed service needs, we include a sixth bundle of service coordination items. 59 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation SERVICE RECEIPT BUNDLE SCORES SVORI programs were successful in greatly increasing access to a wide range of services and programming. Exhibit 43. Service receipt bundle scores across service bundles, by group Exhibit 43 shows the service receipt bundle scores for all SVORI and non-SVORI respondents and clearly demonstrates that SVORI programs were successful in greatly increasing access to a wide range of services and programming. On average, SVORI respondents reported receiving about 60% of the items in the coordination bundle, which includes assessments and reentry planning. In comparison, non-SVORI respondents reported receiving only about one-third of the services in the bundle. For the remainder of the service bundles, all respondents reported receiving, on average, less than 40% of the bundle items, with SVORI respondents significantly more likely to report receipt of more of the services in a bundle. 60 Coordination services 33 29 Transitional services 17 25 20 Health services Employment/education/life skills services 30 16 11 a Child servicesa SVORI 6 Non-SVORI 8 Domestic violence services 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 Note: All differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are significant at p < 0.05. a Among those who reported having minor children. The following subsections provide additional detail on the items within individual service receipt bundles. This is followed by a review of the service receipt bundle scores, where we find considerable variability among the sites. COORDINATION SERVICES The use of needs assessments and the coordination of services were integral to the concept of the SVORI programs—both as defined by the federal funders and as described by the SVORI programs—in order to ensure that identified needs were met 60 Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI respondents were much more likely to report that they received coordination services than were non-SVORI respondents. with appropriate services and programming. For example, in response to our 2005 program director survey, 90% of the adult program directors said that they were attempting to provide all needed services to participants rather than focusing on a specific service or set of services. Exhibit 44 shows the proportion of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents who reported receiving each of the five coordination services. SVORI respondents were much more likely to report that they received coordination services than were non-SVORI respondents. (All differences are statistically significant at the 0.05 level.) Exhibit 44. Self-reported receipt of specific coordination services, by group 66% Release planning 31% 66% Case manager 40% 63% Needs assessment 45% 57% Reentry plan 24% 49% Release needs assessment 23% 0% 25% 50% SVORI Non-SVORI 75% 100% Note: p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. The overall levels of service receipt, however, were low. The overall levels of service receipt, however, were substantially less than 100%. 25 For example, only 66% of SVORI respondents said that they had met with a case manager—the same percentage that said that they had “worked with anyone to plan for release.” 26 About two-thirds of SVORI respondents (63%) said that they had received a needs assessment, and only 49% said that they had received a needs assessment specifically for release. Only 57% of the SVORI respondents said that they had developed a reentry plan. 25 It should be noted that individuals still had an average of 30 days before they were released, during which time they might have received services that are not reflected here. 26 Two of the sites, Indiana and Maryland, were post-release programs and did not have an explicit SVORI in-prison phase. 61 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 45 shows the cross-site variability in the provision of coordination services, as reported by our respondents. Service bundle scores ranged from 15 for non-SVORI respondents in South Carolina to 93 for SVORI respondents in Iowa. The average score of 93 for the SVORI respondents in Iowa indicates that most of these individuals received case management, assessments, and release/reentry planning. A number of other SVORI programs were also highly successful in providing most of these services to their participants. Although the South Carolina SVORI program score of 48 was less than some other programs, it represents a more than threefold increase over the bundle score of 15 for non-SVORI respondents in South Carolina that suggests case management and reentry planning are not part of the usual pre-release experience for South Carolina prisoners. In other states, however, the average non-SVORI bundle scores were approximately 50, suggesting that there is some assessment, case management, and reentry planning as part of the status quo. Exhibit 45. Average service receipt bundle scores for the coordination services bundle, by site and group 100 93 SVORI 90 Non-SVORI 87 80 74 69 60 69 52 52 54 51 57 54 48 44 40 45 43 40 29 30 28 27 23 20 20 15 0 IA* IN KS* ME MD* MO* NV* OH* OK *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. 62 PA* SC* WA Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report TRANSITIONAL SERVICES For all but one of the transitional services, SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that they had received the service. Transitional services are programs and assistance that help individuals prepare for returning to the community, including assistance finding housing and transportation. Exhibit 46 shows responses about 30 days prior to release for the 12 transitional services included in this bundle. For all but one of the transitional services, SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that they had received the service. Again, however, the levels are less than 100%. The most commonly reported item was attending a program to prepare for release (75% of SVORI compared with 51% of non-SVORI respondents) or attending classes to prepare for release (65% and 37% of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). Exhibit 46. Self-reported receipt of specific transitional services, by group 75% Release preparation programs* 51% 65% Release preparation classes* 37% 41% Help with documents* 26% 28% Help finding a place to live* 13% 22% Help getting a driver's license* 8% 21% Help accessing clothing/food banks* 11% 20% Mentoring* 8% 19% 12% 14% 11% 13% 9% 13% 4% 12% 8% Help finding transportation* Help accessing public financial assistance Help accessing public health care* Help accessing financial assistance* Help obtaining legal assistance* 0% 20% SVORI Non-SVORI 40% 60% 80% 100% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Less than half of SVORI respondents (41%) reported that they had received help obtaining documents that would be needed for employment, and only about one-quarter of SVORI respondents reported that they had received help finding a 63 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation place to live (28%) or help getting a driver’s license (22%). About one-fifth (21%) of SVORI respondents said that they had received information to help them access resources in the community, such as clothing or food banks. In general, however, 20% or less of the SVORI respondents indicated that they had received mentoring (20%), help finding transportation (19%), help accessing public financial assistance (14%), help accessing financial assistance (13%), help accessing public health care (13%), and help obtaining legal assistance (12%). Among these less frequently received services (with the exception of help accessing public financial assistance), the SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than the non-SVORI respondents to report receiving this help. Cross-site variation in the reports of receipt of services for the transitional services bundle can be seen in Exhibit 47. Again, SVORI respondents in most sites reported receiving significantly more of the services than did the non-SVORI respondents. Exhibit 47. Average service receipt bundle scores for the transitional services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 58 40 38 40 35 29 20 19 18 19 20 15 10 31 31 28 11 10 11 13 MO* NV* 26 23 20 18 16 10 0 IA* IN* KS* ME MD OH* OK *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. 64 PA SC* WA* Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Average scores ranged from 10 to 58, suggesting that, in some sites, respondents received on average only about 1 of the 12 services, while in others they received as many as 7 services. Among the groups who reported receiving low levels of transitional services, the most commonly reported were programs or classes to prepare them for release (data not shown). HEALTH SERVICES SVORI respondents were much more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that they had received treatment for substance abuse. SVORI respondents were less likely to report receiving mental health treatment for emotional problems. Respondents from both groups were almost equally likely to report receiving any medical treatment (58% SVORI, 55% nonSVORI). Exhibit 48 shows the proportion of each group who reported receiving each of the different types of medical services. SVORI respondents were much more likely than nonSVORI respondents to report that they had received any treatment for AOD—48% of SVORI respondents compared with 38% of non-SVORI respondents—and that they had received specific substance abuse treatment services, such as Alcoholics Anonymous/Narcotics Anonymous (AA/NA), drug education, and information on accessing substance abuse treatment in the community. SVORI respondents were also more likely to report having been given information on how to access mental and physical health care after release. Furthermore, SVORI respondents were more likely to report that they had received preventive medical services or medical treatment for a physical health problem and had participated in anger management classes. SVORI respondents were, however, less likely to report receiving mental health treatment for emotional problems. 27 Very few respondents in either group reported that they had participated in groups designed to help victims of abuse— although SVORI respondents were about twice as likely as nonSVORI respondents (7% versus 3%) to indicate that they had attended programs for abuse victims. 27 Non-SVORI respondents were more likely to report needing mental health treatment. As noted in the Service Needs section, 29% of non-SVORI respondents versus 22% of SVORI respondents said that they needed mental health treatment. 65 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 48. Self-reported receipt of specific health services, by group 58% 55% Any medical treatment 39% 33% 37% 31% Medical treatment for physical health* Preventive medical services* Dental services Rx medications for physical health Info on accessing health care* Any MH treatment* Individual MH counseling Group MH counseling Info on accessing MH care* Any AOD treatment* AA/NA* Drug education* Group AOD counseling Individual AOD counseling Residential AOD treatment Methadone Detox Info on accessing AOD treatment* Anger management program* Victims' group for abuse* 50% 47% 37% 34% 26% 15% 16% 20% 9% 11% 4% 4% 24% 13% 48% 38% 34% 28% 39% 26% 25% 21% 14% 14% 11% 10% 1% 0% 2% 2% 43% 33% 34% 26% 7% 3% 0% 25% 50% SVORI Non-SVORI 75% 100% Note: AA=Alcoholics Anonymous, AOD=alcohol and other drugs, MH=mental health, NA=narcotics anonymous, Rx=prescription. *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Exhibit 49 shows the health services bundle scores by site and group. Scores ranged from 13 to 40. Differences in scores were driven primarily by the receipt of services other than medical treatment (data not shown). SVORI respondents were more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report receiving AOD treatment or anger management programs in 9 of the 12 sites (data not shown). Alternatively, non-SVORI respondents in six sites were more likely than SVORI respondents to report receiving mental health treatment (data not shown). 66 Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 49. Average service receipt bundle scores for the health services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 40 37 40 28 19 21 20 23 22 35 32 27 31 22 20 15 15 28 26 24 23 22 20 17 15 13 0 IA* IN KS ME MD MO* NV* OH OK PA SC* WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. EMPLOYMENT/EDUCATION/SKILLS SERVICES About three-fourths (74%) of respondents reported they had received some kind of employment, education, or skills–related service while incarcerated. SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report having received at least one of the services in the employment/ education/skills services bundle (79% SVORI, 68% nonSVORI). As shown in Exhibit 50, SVORI respondents were also significantly more likely to report having received each of the services included in the employment/education/skills bundle. The most frequently reported type of service was educational services, with 53% of SVORI respondents and 43% of nonSVORI respondents reporting that they had received educational services while incarcerated. Just over half (52%) of SVORI respondents reported having received training on how to change their attitudes related to criminal behavior, compared with roughly one-third (36%) of non-SVORI respondents. In addition, SVORI respondents were twice as likely as non-SVORI 67 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation respondents to report that they had received life skills training (42% SVORI, 21% non-SVORI) and assistance with personal relationships (25% SVORI, 13% non-SVORI), and three times as likely to report that they had received assistance with money management (24% SVORI, 8% non-SVORI). Exhibit 50. Self-reported receipt of specific employment, education, and skills services, by group Employment/Education/Skills Services Received any employment services* Participated in employment readiness program* Participated in job training program* Talked to potential employer* Given advice about job interviewing* Given advice about answering questions about criminal history* Given advice about how to behave on the job* Given names of people to contact in community to find a job* Put together a resume* Received any educational services* Received money management services* Received other life skills training* Received assistance with personal relationships* Received training to change criminal behavior attitudes* SVORI 37% Non-SVORI 19% 23% 17% 15% 32% 9% 4% 6% 14% 30% 13% 31% 13% 27% 24% 53% 24% 42% 24% 10% 43% 8% 21% 25% 13% 52% 36% *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI. Respondents were also asked about a variety of services related to finding employment in the community following their release from incarceration. Almost two-fifths (37%) of SVORI respondents received any employment services, compared with about one-fifth (19%) of non-SVORI respondents. Close to onethird of SVORI respondents reported that they had been given advice about job interviewing (32%), how to behave on the job (31%), or answering questions from potential employers about their criminal history (30%), while only about one out of every seven non-SVORI respondents (14%) had been given interview advice and one out of every eight (13%) had been given advice regarding job behavior or answering questions about criminal history. In addition, roughly one-fourth of SVORI respondents reported they had put together a resumé (24%) or had participated in employment readiness programs (23%) while 68 Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report incarcerated, compared with one-tenth of non-SVORI respondents. Exhibit 51 shows the employment/education/skills services receipt bundle scores by site and group. Exhibit 51. Average service receipt bundle scores for the employment/education/skills services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 74 60 49 48 40 40 31 31 22 20 22 20 10 12 12 13 13 15 26 25 20 19 16 13 14 9 7 0 IA* IN* KS* ME MD MO* NV* OH OK PA SC* WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. Scores ranged from a low of 7 for SVORI respondents in Maine to a high of 74 for SVORI respondents in Iowa. In other words, SVORI respondents in Iowa received, on average, three-fourths of all the services in the employment/education/ skills bundle. In 8 of the 12 sites, SVORI respondents had higher employment/education/skills services receipt bundle scores than non-SVORI respondents, and in 5 of those sites (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nevada, and South Carolina), the differences in bundle scores between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were statistically significant. Non-SVORI respondents’ employment/education/skills services receipt bundle scores were higher than those of SVORI respondents in three sites, 69 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation and in one of the three sites (Indiana), non-SVORI respondents had significantly higher receipt bundle scores than SVORI respondents. Although SVORI respondents, on average, reported receiving a greater proportion of services in the employment/education/ skills bundle than did non-SVORI respondents in most sites, the service receipt bundle scores for all 24 groups were relatively low compared with their service need bundle scores, which ranged from 64 to 83 (see discussion on pages 48–49). DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES Domestic violence services included two programs—a batterer intervention program and a domestic violence support group. Overall, 5% of the SVORI and 3% of the non-SVORI respondents reported participating in a batterer intervention program, while 11% and 6% of the SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively, reported that they had participated in domestic violence support groups. Participation in domestic violence services was extremely rare. 70 As can be seen in Exhibit 52, in most sites and for both groups, participation in domestic violence services was rare. The highest bundle scores were obtained in Nevada and Missouri with scores of 24 and 15 for SVORI respondents, respectively. In Nevada, the score of 24 reflects the 38% of SVORI respondents who reported participating in domestic violence support groups and the 10% of SVORI respondents who reported participating in batterer intervention programs (data not shown). In contrast, in Missouri, all of the SVORI respondents who received domestic violence programs reported participating in a domestic violence support group and none reported participating in batterer intervention (data not shown). Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit 52. Average service receipt bundle scores for the domestic violence services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 40 24 20 15 12 11 2 5 4 4 0 1 12 7 4 3 MD MO* 3 3 1 2 9 2 9 4 7 1 0 IA IN KS ME NV* OH OK PA SC* WA *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. CHILD SERVICES Reports of programming to help with child-related matters were also rare across all of the sites. As shown in Exhibit 53, the child service receipt bundle scores for SVORI respondents ranged from 13 to 56, whereas the values for non-SVORI respondents ranged from 10 to 33. Only respondents from the Iowa SVORI program had a score greater than 50 (56), which implies that a participant received slightly more than half of the services. The level of service receipt reported by SVORI participants was more than double the 24 for the non-SVORI respondents. Average service receipt among SVORI respondents was also more than double that reported by nonSVORI respondents in three other sites—Kansas, Missouri, and Nevada—and almost double in South Carolina. The most commonly reported child-related programs reported to have been received in these two programs were parenting classes and assistance finding child care (data not shown). 71 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 53. Average service receipt bundle scores for the child services bundle, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 56 41 39 40 40 31 33 31 24 20 23 13 22 15 18 22 16 14 17 27 25 20 19 20 15 10 0 IA* IN* KS* ME MD MO* NV* OH* OK PA SC* WA* *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. LEVELS OF RECEIPT ACROSS SERVICES Exhibit A-4 (Appendix A) shows the proportion of each group who reported that they had received each of the 55 services included in the six service receipt bundles. Overall, the SVORI respondents were much more likely to report receiving most of these services than the non-SVORI respondents. Specifically, as shown in Exhibit 54, most SVORI respondents commonly reported participating in programs to prepare for release (75%), meeting with a case manager (66%), working with someone to plan for release (66%), taking a class specifically for release (65%), and receiving a needs assessment (63%). SVORI respondents were significantly more likely to report receiving these services. Overall, for most (93%) of the services, SVORI respondents were more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report having received the service (see Exhibit A-3). For three-quarters of the services, SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than nonSVORI respondents to report they had received the service while incarcerated. Non-SVORI respondents were more likely 72 Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report than SVORI respondents to report they had received only four of the pre-release services, and for only one of these services (any mental health treatment) was the difference in service receipt between the two groups significant. Exhibit 54. Most commonly reported services received, by group Participated in programs to prepare for release 75% 51% 66% Met with case manager 40% 66% Worked with anyone to plan for release 31% 65% Took class specifically for release SVORI 37% 63% Received needs assessment Non-SVORI 45% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Note: All differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are significant at p < 0.05. Overall, SVORI respondents reported receiving almost onethird of the service items, in contrast to non-SVORI respondents, who reported receiving about one-fifth of the services. Similar to the “all services” need bundle, we also created an “all services” receipt bundle, which captures the level of overall service receipt across all 55 services. Overall, SVORI respondents reported receiving almost one-third of the service items, in contrast to the non-SVORI respondents, who reported receiving about one-fifth of the services (average service bundle scores of 29 for SVORI and 18 for non-SVORI). Based on program director survey responses and site visits to the adult impact sites, we expected to observe considerable variability in the delivery of services to the SVORI participants. Additionally, because the types and amounts of services provided on a routine basis to prisoners vary considerably across correctional systems, we also expected to observe considerable variation in the services delivered to our nonSVORI respondents who were receiving “treatment as usual” while in prison. Exhibit 55 shows the service receipt bundle scores across all services by site and group and clearly demonstrates that the self-reported receipt of services while in prison did, in fact, vary among respondents. 73 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit 55. Average service receipt bundle scores for all services, by site and group 100 SVORI Non-SVORI 80 60 56 41 39 40 40 33 31 24 20 23 13 15 18 22 31 22 16 14 17 27 25 20 20 19 15 10 0 IA* IN* KS* ME MD MO* NV* OH* OK PA SC* WA* *p < 0.05 for test of significant difference between SVORI and non-SVORI within site. The bundle scores for SVORI respondents ranged from 13 to 56, whereas the scores for non-SVORI respondents ranged from 10 to 33. Only respondents from the Iowa SVORI program reported receiving more than 50% of the services (average score of 56), more than double the score of the non-SVORI respondents (24). Average service receipt among SVORI respondents was also more than double that reported by nonSVORI respondents in three other sites—Kansas, Missouri, and Nevada—and almost double in South Carolina. The average proportion of services reported having been received by SVORI respondents in some sites was lower than the average proportion of services reported received by nonSVORI respondents in other sites—reflecting the differences in the status quo levels of services across sites that served as a starting point for SVORI program development. SVORI respondents in 7 of the 12 sites reported receiving significantly more services than their non-SVORI counterparts. In four sites, there was not a significant difference in reported service receipt, and, in one site, the SVORI respondents reported receiving significantly fewer services, on average, than the non- 74 Service Receipt — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report SVORI respondents. As mentioned earlier, Indiana and Maryland were post-release programs that did not explicitly incorporate additional services SVORI participants prior to release from incarceration. In addition, Pennsylvania’s SVORI program, although not solely a post-release program, was not designed to provide additional services, other than enhanced case management, during the in-prison phase. 75 Conclusions This report presents findings from the 1,697 pre-release interviews conducted with adult males in the 12 adult program impact sites studied as part of the SVORI multi-site evaluation. These interviews were conducted between July 2004 and November 2005, as the first of four waves of interviews with SVORI program participants and comparison subjects. The prerelease interviews provide information on the characteristics of study respondents, including their criminal history and preincarceration substance use, as well as detailed data on their need for and receipt of services and programs. This section provides a summary description of respondent characteristics and their service needs and receipt, discusses the comparability of the two study groups, and assesses the implications of the findings with respect to the potential for successful reentry. The section concludes with a discussion of future reports. CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS The respondents were about 29 years of age, on average, and the majority reported their race as black. Less than 40% reported that they were currently married or in a steady relationship, although more than 60% reported that they were the fathers of minor children. Prior to their current incarceration, most reported that they had lived in a house or apartment that belonged to someone else. Only about one-third reported that they had lived in their own house or apartment, and 12% reported that they were homeless, living in a shelter, or had no set place to live during the 6 months prior to their current incarceration. About three-quarters of the respondents reported that they had family members who had been incarcerated or who had alcohol or drug problems. Similarly, 77 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation more than 80% reported that, prior to their incarceration, they had friends who had been incarcerated or had drug or alcohol problems. Overall, the study participants reported being physically healthy, with most reporting that their health did not limit their current physical activities. Additionally, few study participants reported currently experiencing physical health problems. The most commonly reported problem—by about 12% of the respondents—was chronic back pain, followed by asthma (about 11%) and high blood pressure (about 9%). The percentages of respondents reporting currently experiencing these conditions were about half the rates reporting that they had ever had these conditions. Reported levels of tuberculosis, heart trouble, hepatitis B or C, and arthritis were less than 5%, while only 1% of the respondents reported being diagnosed HIV positive or with AIDS. Indicators of mental health functioning and symptomology suggest that, overall, the study participants were functioning at about the same level as the general U.S. population and, although some symptoms of mental health problems were reported, a large majority of the respondents did not have severe mental health problems. In addition, most respondents rated their mental health status as excellent or very good. More than 55% of the respondents reported that they had received treatment for a mental health or substance use problem—the most common reasons for this treatment were drug abuse or dependence (about 40%), alcohol abuse or dependence (about 25%), and depression (about 20%). Nearly all of the respondents reported having used alcohol and marijuana during their lifetime, and more than half reported having used cocaine. Reported age at first use for these two substances was about 14 years. A substantial proportion—more than 40%—reported ever having used hallucinogens, while fewer reported using amphetamines, tranquilizers, pain relievers, heroin, sedatives, stimulants, and inhalants. Overall, the respondents reported limited educational attainment and spotty employment histories, working primarily as laborers or service workers. About 60% of the respondents reported completing 12th grade or earning a GED. While 90% of the respondents reported having worked at some point, only about two-thirds reported that they had worked during the 6 months preceding their current incarceration. Of these, more 78 Conclusions — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report than one-third reported that they had had two or more jobs during that period. The respondents reported lengthy criminal histories, beginning with a first arrest at the average age of 16 and an average of 12 arrests. About half of respondents had served time in juvenile detention facilities, and about 85% had served a prior prison sentence. About 40% of respondents reported that they were currently serving time for a violent offense; fewer respondents reported that their current offenses included property, drug, or public order offenses. At the time of the interviews, SVORI respondents reported that they had been incarcerated an average of 2.8 years compared with an average of 2.3 years reported by the non-SVORI respondents. SERVICE NEEDS Respondents reported high levels of need—particularly for transitional services and services related to employment, education, and skills development. Of the 10 items included in the transitional service needs bundle, at least 45% of the respondents reported that they would need each of the items once they were released. More than 80% reported needing financial assistance and a driver’s license once they were released, while about 75% said that they would need public health care insurance. Transportation was also identified as a need by about 70% of the respondents. Access to food and clothing banks, a mentor, documents for employment, and public financial assistance were identified as needs by between 50% and 60%. Between 45% and 50% reported needing legal assistance or a place to live. Nearly all of the respondents (99%) reported needing at least one of the six education/employment/skills services, and most respondents reported needing at least three-quarters of the items. The highest expressed need was for more education (more than 90%), while nearly 80% said that they would need a job upon release. Help learning money management and other life skills was identified as needed by nearly threequarters of all respondents, while nearly two-thirds said they needed to change their attitudes related to criminal behavior or work on their personal relationships. The majority reported needing health services post release, with nearly 60% reporting that they would need medical 79 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation treatment or physical health care, about 40% reporting that they would need AOD treatment, and about 25% reporting that they would need mental health treatment. Very few of the respondents reported needing either of the two domestic violence services—batterer intervention programs or domestic violence support groups. Of the 995 fathers who were interviewed, more than 60% said they needed help developing parenting skills, and about 40% said they would need help with child care post release. Although reported needs were similar for the SVORI and nonSVORI respondents, there were substantial differences in reports of the services received during incarceration. These differences in service receipt are explored more fully in the following subsection. SERVICE RECEIPT SVORI programs were successful in greatly increasing access to a wide range of services and programming—although overall levels of service receipt were less than 100%. Programs were particularly effective in increasing coordination services, approximately doubling or more than doubling the proportion of individuals receiving release planning, needs assessment, release-related needs assessment, reentry plan development, and assignment of a case manager. SVORI respondents were also significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that they had received the 12 transitional services. Again, however, the levels are less than 100%. The most commonly reported item was attending a program to prepare for release (75% of SVORI compared with 51% of non-SVORI respondents) or attending classes to prepare for release (65% and 37% of SVORI and non-SVORI respondents, respectively). Respondents from both groups were almost equally likely to report receiving medical treatment (58% SVORI, 55% nonSVORI). However, SVORI respondents were much more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report that they had received treatment for AOD and that they had received specific substance abuse treatment services, such as AA/NA, drug education, and information on accessing substance abuse treatment in the community. SVORI respondents were also 80 Conclusions — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report more likely to report having been given information on how to access mental and physical health care after release. SVORI respondents were, however, less likely to report receiving mental health treatment for emotional problems—consistent with the finding that non-SVORI respondents were more likely to report needing mental health treatment. About three-fourths (74%) of respondents reported they had received some kind of employment, education, or skills–related service while incarcerated. SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to report having received at least one of the services in the employment/ education/skills services bundle. Respondents were also asked about services related to finding employment in the community following their release from incarceration. Almost two-fifths (37%) of SVORI respondents received employment services, compared with about one-fifth (19%) of non-SVORI respondents. Very few respondents reported participating in either a batterer intervention program or a domestic violence support group. Reports of programming to help with child-related matters were also rare across all of the sites. The most commonly reported child-related programs reported to have been received in these two programs were parenting classes and assistance finding child care. In general, SVORI respondents reported receiving more prerelease services than did non-SVORI respondents. This finding supports the conclusion that the SVORI programs were successful in significantly increasing the level of services and programming provided to participants. COMPARABILITY OF SVORI AND NONSVORI RESPONDENTS The impact evaluation findings hinge on the comparability of the two evaluation study groups—those who participated in SVORI programs and the non-SVORI respondents who were identified as comparison subjects for this evaluation. Only two sites—Iowa and Ohio—randomly assigned individuals to their SVORI programs; for the remainder of the sites, the evaluation team worked with the local program staff to identify appropriate populations from which to identify comparison subjects. The goal of this exercise was to find groups of 81 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation subjects who were similar to those participating in SVORI programs and to have local staff in the sites (usually individuals working with agency management information systems) provide lists of these individuals to the evaluation team during the first wave of interviews. If we were successful in identifying comparable non-SVORI respondents, we would expect to find few differences between the groups on variables that measured characteristics prior to the time at which assignment to SVORI could be made. For our interview data, this expectation refers to variables measuring pre-incarceration characteristics. In the “Characteristics” section, we thoroughly discussed the characteristics of the respondents and provided comparisons of the average values for the SVORI and non-SVORI groups. Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A provides the means, standard deviations, and t-statistics for many of these variables. In this subsection, we focus our discussion on the handful of variables for which statistically significant differences between the two groups were identified. 28 Exhibit 56 lists the variables where the differences between groups were statistically significant at the.05 level. Those participating in SVORI programs were somewhat less likely to be white and somewhat more likely to be black. Non-SVORI respondents were more likely to report that they were born outside of the United States, but very few subjects in either group were not native born. Although about 38% of both the SVORI and non-SVORI groups reported currently being in a steady relationship or married, those in the non-SVORI group were more likely than the SVORI respondents to report that they had lived with that person prior to the current incarceration. Responses differed on three of the employment measures, although the differences were small. Non-SVORI respondents were more likely than SVORI respondents to report ever having a job (92% versus 89%) and to have been employed during the 6 months prior to incarceration (68% versus 64%). The nonSVORI respondents were also more likely to have reported that they supported themselves by “other” means during the 6 months prior to incarceration (10% versus 7%). 28 82 Here, statistical significance is defined by a two-tailed test at α = 0.05. Conclusions — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report As can be seen in Exhibit 56, 12 of the 25 variables for which statistically significant differences were observed were AOD measures. Non-SVORI respondents were somewhat more likely than SVORI respondents to report having ever used a drug and somewhat more likely to report having tried more types of drugs. In contrast, the groups differed on reports of drug use during the 30 days prior to incarceration on only one drug— with non-SVORI respondents who reported ever using sedatives more likely than similar SVORI respondents to report sedative use during the 30 days prior to incarceration. Exhibit 56. Statistically significant differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents Variable Demographic Characteristics Race: White Race: Black Born in United States Before prison, live with person with whom currently in steady relationship/married Employment Ever held a job Employed during 6 months prior to incarceration How supported self 6 months prior to incarceration: Other Alcohol and Drugs Age last time you drank alcohol if no use 30 days prior to incarceration Number of drugs used lifetime Ever used tranquilizers Ever used stimulants Ever used pain relievers Ever used methadone Ever used hallucinogens Ever used cocaine Ever used heroin Number of drugs used 30 days prior to incarceration Used sedatives 30 days prior to incarceration Age first used amphetamines Criminal History Duration of incarceration at baseline (years) Conviction offense: Drug crime Conviction offense: Public order crime Currently serving time for parole violation Ever in jail/prison for more than 24 hours at one time Number of times sent to prison N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 1,697 1,697 1,697 670 0.31 (0.46) 0.56 (0.50) 1.00 (0.07) 0.59 (0.49) 0.37 (0.48) 0.50 (0.50) 0.98 (0.13) 0.67 (0.47) 1,696 1,696 1,693 0.89 (0.31) 0.64 (0.48) 0.07 (0.25) 0.92 (0.27) 0.68 (0.47) 0.10 (0.30) 479 24.18 (7.41) 25.66 (7.86) 1,697 1,695 1,696 1,695 1,695 1,695 1,694 1,695 1,697 333 473 3.39 (2.78) 0.25 (0.43) 0.16 (0.36) 0.24 (0.43) 0.06 (0.24) 0.43 (0.50) 0.53 (0.50) 0.18 (0.38) 1.37 (1.56) 0.31 (0.46) 17.10 (3.76) 3.84 (2.93) 0.31 (0.46) 0.20 (0.40) 0.30 (0.46) 0.09 (0.29) 0.49 (0.50) 0.58 (0.49) 0.23 (0.42) 1.58 (1.75) 0.43 (0.50) 18.47 (4.81) 1,697 1,687 1,687 1,694 1,694 1,434 2.76 (2.46) 0.36 (0.48) 0.17 (0.37) 0.23 (0.42) 0.83 (0.38) 1.45 (1.82) 2.26 (2.63) 0.31 (0.46) 0.24 (0.43) 0.31 (0.46) 0.87 (0.33) 1.69 (2.05) SD = standard deviation. Note: All differences between SVORI and non-SVORI are significant at p < 0.05. 83 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation The observed differences in criminal history include non-SVORI respondents being more likely to have reported that they were currently serving time for a parole violation—31% versus 23%, respectively. This finding is consistent with the higher proportion of non-SVORI respondents reporting that their conviction offense(s) included a public order crime, including parole violation offenses (if they are charged as an offense). Similarly, the measures of prior incarcerations were higher for non-SVORI than SVORI respondents, again perhaps reflecting the initial incarceration that preceded the current incarceration for the violation. The shorter length of stay at interview may also be related to a return for a parole violation. IMPLICATIONS Given that we examined hundreds of variables, the relatively few differences found suggest that our strategy to identify comparison subjects was largely successful. However, because race, employment, offense type, and substance use are often linked to recidivism, the outcome analyses will control for these differences. Service receipt was the one area in which substantial and significant differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were observed. Such a finding was expected, of course, because the intent of the SVORI funding is to increase prisoner access to needed services and programming. FUTURE REPORTS Other publications from this evaluation will present results from the pre-release interviews with women and juvenile males. Over the course of the next year, the evaluation team will report on findings from post-release interviews, which focused on reentry experiences and outcomes on a variety of domains, including employment, housing, substance use, criminal behavior, physical and mental health, and family and community integration. 84 References Lattimore, P.K., S. Brumbaugh, C. Visher, C.H. Lindquist, L. Winterfield, M. Salas, and J. Zweig (2004). National Portrait of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (RTI Report 8805). Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute. Lattimore, P.K., C.A. Visher, L. Winterfield, C. Lindquist, and S. Brumbaugh (2005). Implementation of Prisoner Reentry Programs: Findings from the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative Multi-site Evaluation. Justice Research and Policy, 7(2):87–109. Lindquist, C. (2005). Reentry Research in Action: Implementation of SVORI Programs. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International. http://www.svorievaluation.org/documents/reports/RRI A-Implementation.pdf Petersilia, J. (2003) When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry. New York: Oxford University Press. Strategic Advantages, Inc. (2000). Symptom Assessment-45 Questionnaire (SA-45). New York: Multi-Health Systems Inc. Travis, J. and Visher, C. eds. (2005). Prisoner Reentry and Crime in America. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Ware, J.E., Jr., M. Kosinski, D.M. Turner-Bowker, and B. Gandek (2002). How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12® Health Survey (with a Supplement Documenting Version 1). Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated. Winterfield, L., and S. Brumbaugh (2005). Reentry Research in Action: Characteristics of Prisoner Reentry Programs for Juveniles. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International. http://www.svorievaluation.org/documents/reports/RRI A-Juvenile Program Characteristics Report.pdf 85 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Winterfield, L., and C. Lindquist (2005). Reentry Research in Action: Characteristics of Prisoner Reentry Programs. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International. http://www.svorievaluation.org/documents/reports/RRI A-Program Characteristics Report.pdf Winterfield, L., P.K. Lattimore, D.M. Steffey, S.M. Brumbaugh, and C.H. Lindquist (2006). The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative: Measuring the Effects on Service Delivery. Western Criminology Review, 7(2):3– 19. 86 Appendix A. Data Tables Exhibit A-1. Adult male case disposition—Wave 1 (pre-release) TOTAL ALL CASES Case Disposition—Eligible Cases Completed Interview completed Released Early R released prior to Wave 1 interview Refused Final refusal by R, guardian or other Access Denied Access to R denied by prison Other Non-Interview R absconded Private setting not available R deceased Language barrier--Spanish Language barrier--Other Physically/mentally incapable Other non-interview TOTAL ELIGIBLE CASES Case Disposition—Ineligible Cases Ineligible Cases R transferred to non-study facility R releasing to non-study area R not releasing during data collection period Date of release unknown Case fielded incorrectly R ineligible to participate Site dropped from study Other ineligible TOTAL INELIGIBLE CASES SVORI N % 1406 43.92% Non-SVORI N % 1795 56.08% SVORI % of Eligible N SVORI Non-SVORI % of Eligible N NS All Cases N % 3201 100.00% All Cases N % of Eligible 863 73.70% 834 59.87% 1697 66.19% 169 14.43% 369 26.49% 538 20.98% 126 10.76% 166 11.92% 295 11.51% 6 0.51% 8 0.57% 14 0.55% 2 2 1 1 0 1 0 1171 0.17% 0.17% 0.09% 0.09% 0.00% 0.09% 0.00% 100.00% 3 1 0 5 1 2 1 1393 0.22% 0.07% 0.00% 0.36% 0.07% 0.14% 0.07% 100.00% 5 3 1 6 1 3 1 2564 0.20% 0.12% 0.04% 0.23% 0.04% 0.12% 0.04% 100.00% SVORI % of Ineligible N SVORI Non-SVORI % of Ineligible N NS All Cases N % of Ineligible 21 7 8.94% 2.98% 56 37 13.93% 9.20% 77 41 12.09% 6.44% 100 42.55% 92 22.89% 192 30.14% 2 5 86 4 10 235 0.85% 2.13% 36.60% 1.70% 4.26% 100.00% 25 158 12 18 4 402 6.22% 39.30% 2.99% 4.48% 1.00% 100.00% 32 163 98 28 6 637 5.02% 25.59% 15.38% 4.40% 0.94% 100.00% A-1 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group Characteristic Demographics and Housing Age at incarceration Age at pre-release (Wave 1) interview White Black Hispanic Multiracial/other Born in United States English is primary language Homeless/shelter/no set place to live prior to incarceration Employment History Ever held a job Employed during 6 months prior to incarceration Source of support 6 months prior to incarceration: Family Source of support 6 months prior to incarceration: Friends Source of support 6 months prior to incarceration: Government Source of support 6 months prior to incarceration: Illegal income Source of support 6 months prior to incarceration: Other Last job: Hours worked per week Last job: Hourly salary Last job: Was permanent Last job: Received formal pay Last job: Health insurance provided Completed 12th grade or GED/other high school equivalent Currently in school Ever served in the military Family and Peers Married Involved in steady relationship 6 months prior to incarceration Currently married or in steady relationship Lived with spouse/partner before incarceration N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 1697 1697 1694 1694 1694 1694 1697 1697 26.13 (7.49) 28.89 (7.14) 0.32 (0.46) 0.57 (0.50) 0.04 (0.20) 0.08 (0.27) 1.00 (0.07) 0.98 (0.13) 27.06 (7.41) 29.30 (7.48) 0.37 (0.48) 0.50 (0.50) 0.04 (0.20) 0.09 (0.29) 0.98 (0.13) 0.97 (0.16) −2.57 −1.17 −2.30 2.74 −0.13 −0.89 2.59 1.59 1695 0.12 (0.33) 0.12 (0.33) 0.18 1696 0.89 (0.31) 0.92 (0.27) −2.21 1696 0.64 (0.48) 0.68 (0.47) −2.04 1693 0.32 (0.47) 0.31 (0.46) 0.15 1693 0.16 (0.37) 0.14 (0.35) 1.40 1693 0.11 (0.31) 0.10 (0.30) 0.48 1693 0.45 (0.50) 0.43 (0.50) 0.99 1693 0.07 (0.25) 0.10 (0.30) −2.14 1107 1083 1117 1120 1094 41.72 (13.86) 10.91 (8.51) 0.75 (0.43) 0.74 (0.44) 0.37 (0.48) 41.76 (14.07) 10.13 (6.87) 0.73 (0.44) 0.72 (0.45) 0.34 (0.47) −0.04 1.67 0.65 0.64 0.93 1695 0.61 (0.49) 0.58 (0.49) 0.88 1697 1697 0.15 (0.35) 0.05 (0.22) 0.13 (0.34) 0.05 (0.21) 0.83 0.39 1697 0.09 (0.28) 0.10 (0.30) −1.05 1693 0.68 (0.47) 0.69 (0.46) −0.28 1690 0.39 (0.49) 0.40 (0.49) −0.33 670 0.59 (0.49) 0.67 (0.47) −2.15 t-statistic (continued) A-2 Appendix A — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) Characteristic Family and Peers (continued) Have any living children Number of children (only respondents with children) Number of children (respondents with and without children) Have child(ren) under 18 Primary care responsibilities for any children under 18 6 months prior to incarceration Number of children under 18 supported 6 months prior to incarceration Required to pay child support 6 months prior to incarceration Made court-ordered child support payments 6 months prior to incarceration Court order for support changed while incarcerated Owe back child support Dollar amount of back child support owed State has forgiven/decreased back child support Have people in life that are considered family Have a family member who has been convicted of a crime Have a family member who has been in a correctional facility Have a family member who has had problems with drugs/alcohol Family emotional support scale (0–30: > more support) Had a friend (before incarceration) who has been convicted of a crime Had a friend (before incarceration) who has been in a correctional facility Had a friend (before incarceration) who has had problems with drugs or alcohol Physical and Mental Health Physical health scale (>better) Mental health scale (>better) Received treatment for mental health problem prior to this incarceration Global Severity Index (45–225: >worse) Positive Symptom Total (0–45: >worse) N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 1684 0.62 (0.49) 0.64 (0.48) −0.88 1056 2.22 (1.63) 2.29 (1.60) −0.65 1684 1.37 (1.67) 1.46 (1.69) −1.07 1684 0.59 (0.49) 0.61 (0.49) −0.59 1009 0.47 (0.50) 0.49 (0.50) −0.59 527 1.17 (1.18) 1.19 (1.18) −0.23 1007 0.30 (0.46) 0.32 (0.47) −0.56 312 0.59 (0.49) 0.56 (0.50) 0.51 283 0.26 (0.44) 0.27 (0.44) −0.01 301 0.93 (0.25) 9127.02 (11281.27) 0.91 (0.29) 10728.93 (12558.94) 0.73 253 0.05 (0.21) 0.09 (0.28) −1.21 1697 0.97 (0.16) 0.97 (0.17) 0.27 1574 0.75 (0.43) 0.76 (0.43) −0.22 1602 0.75 (0.44) 0.74 (0.44) 0.21 1591 0.72 (0.45) 0.74 (0.44) −0.99 1615 21.63 (4.87) 21.35 (4.71) 1.18 1540 0.83 (0.37) 0.83 (0.37) −0.07 1556 0.81 (0.39) 0.81 (0.39) 0.03 1572 0.82 (0.39) 0.83 (0.38) −0.42 1673 1673 53.63 (9.23) 48.93 (10.54) 53.34 (9.19) 48.51 (10.65) 0.64 0.80 1693 0.24 (0.43) 0.25 (0.44) −0.52 1697 1697 66.64 (21.43) 12.62 (9.77) 68.09 (23.07) 13.33 (10.07) −1.34 −1.47 234 t-statistic −1.03 (continued) A-3 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) Characteristic Physical and Mental Health (continued) Anxiety Scale (5–25: >worse) Depression Scale (5–25: >worse) Hostility Scale (5–25: >worse) Interpersonal Sensitivity Scale (5–25: >worse) Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (5–25: >worse) Paranoid Ideation Scale (5–25: >worse) Phobic Anxiety Scale (5–25: >worse) Psychoticism Scale (5–25: >worse) Somatization Scale (5–25: >worse) No physical health-related limitations Ever had asthma Currently have asthma Receiving treatment for asthma Taking prescription for asthma Ever had diabetes Currently have diabetes Receiving treatment for diabetes Taking prescription for diabetes Ever had heart trouble Currently have heart trouble Receiving treatment for heart trouble Taking prescription for heart trouble Ever had high blood pressure Currently have high blood pressure Receiving treatment for high blood pressure Taking prescription for high blood pressure Ever had arthritis Currently have arthritis Receiving treatment for arthritis Taking prescription for arthritis Ever had chronic back pain Currently have chronic back pain Receiving treatment for chronic back pain Taking prescription for chronic back pain Ever had tuberculosis Tuberculosis is currently active Ever diagnosed as being HIV positive or having AIDS N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 1696 1696 1697 7.42 (2.90) 8.31 (3.94) 6.41 (2.52) 7.67 (3.18) 8.45 (3.84) 6.69 (2.88) −1.75 −0.76 −2.11 1691 7.50 (3.30) 7.60 (3.55) −0.62 1697 8.12 (3.67) 8.17 (3.66) −0.25 1697 1697 1695 1697 1697 1697 1690 175 175 1696 1693 24 24 1695 1687 53 53 1695 1664 143 144 1697 1696 85 85 1697 1697 205 205 1695 1692 8.84 (3.66) 6.42 (2.32) 6.58 (2.38) 7.05 (2.78) 0.59 (0.49) 0.20 (0.40) 0.11 (0.31) 0.48 (0.50) 0.48 (0.50) 0.02 (0.15) 0.01 (0.11) 0.91 (0.30) 0.91 (0.30) 0.05 (0.23) 0.03 (0.17) 0.36 (0.49) 0.36 (0.49) 0.17 (0.38) 0.09 (0.29) 0.73 (0.45) 0.71 (0.46) 0.05 (0.23) 0.05 (0.21) 0.13 (0.33) 0.13 (0.33) 0.15 (0.35) 0.11 (0.32) 0.14 (0.35) 0.18 (0.39) 0.06 (0.23) 0.00 (0.00) 8.85 (3.74) 6.56 (2.74) 6.89 (2.59) 7.16 (3.04) 0.56 (0.50) 0.19 (0.39) 0.10 (0.30) 0.58 (0.50) 0.61 (0.49) 0.02 (0.13) 0.02 (0.12) 0.77 (0.44) 0.69 (0.48) 0.05 (0.22) 0.03 (0.18) 0.36 (0.49) 0.39 (0.50) 0.16 (0.37) 0.08 (0.27) 0.65 (0.48) 0.61 (0.49) 0.06 (0.23) 0.05 (0.23) 0.22 (0.42) 0.24 (0.43) 0.16 (0.37) 0.13 (0.33) 0.14 (0.35) 0.12 (0.33) 0.07 (0.25) 0.00 (0.03) −0.04 −1.12 −2.61 −0.82 1.20 0.40 0.33 −1.32 −1.64 0.75 −0.49 0.89 1.29 0.49 −0.54 0.02 −0.24 0.70 0.80 1.09 1.25 −0.28 −0.71 −1.17 −1.41 −0.84 −0.93 0.05 1.24 −0.97 −1.00 1697 0.01 (0.08) 0.01 (0.10) −0.60 t-statistic (continued) A-4 Appendix A — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) Characteristic Physical and Mental Health (continued) Receiving treatment for HIV/AIDS Taking prescription for HIV/AIDS Ever had hepatitis B or C Currently have hepatitis B or C Receiving treatment for hepatitis B or C Taking prescription for hepatitis B or C Wear glasses or corrective lenses Need eye glasses Currently use a hearing aid Need a hearing aid Ever received care for mental health or alcohol/drug problems Ever received care for: Alcohol abuse/dependence Ever received care for: Anxiety Ever received care for: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder Ever received care for: Bipolar disorder Ever received care for: Conduct disorder Ever received care for: Depression/dysthymia Ever received care for: Drug abuse/dependence Ever received care for: Obsessivecompulsive disorder Ever received care for: Oppositional defiant disorder Ever received care for: Posttraumatic stress disorder Ever received care for: Phobia (social or specific) Ever received care for: Schizophrenia Ever received care for: Other problem/diagnosis Did not receive care for problem/no diagnosis Currently receiving treatment: Alcohol abuse/dependence Currently receiving treatment: Anxiety disorder Currently receiving treatment: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 14 14 1691 1689 60 60 1697 1238 1697 1690 0.83 (0.41) 0.67 (0.52) 0.03 (0.18) 0.03 (0.16) 0.23 (0.43) 0.14 (0.35) 0.27 (0.45) 0.22 (0.41) 0.00 (0.05) 0.02 (0.15) 0.88 (0.35) 0.88 (0.35) 0.05 (0.22) 0.05 (0.21) 0.11 (0.31) 0.05 (0.23) 0.26 (0.44) 0.22 (0.42) 0.01 (0.08) 0.05 (0.21) −0.20 −0.90 −1.61 −2.25 1.27 1.00 0.34 −0.10 −1.17 −2.54 1696 0.56 (0.50) 0.55 (0.50) 0.32 925 0.25 (0.44) 0.28 (0.45) −0.87 925 0.06 (0.23) 0.07 (0.26) −0.88 925 0.12 (0.33) 0.13 (0.33) −0.31 925 925 0.10 (0.30) 0.03 (0.18) 0.12 (0.33) 0.04 (0.19) −1.23 −0.34 925 0.19 (0.39) 0.20 (0.40) −0.32 925 0.42 (0.49) 0.34 (0.48) 2.33 925 0.01 (0.12) 0.02 (0.12) −0.10 925 0.01 (0.11) 0.00 (0.07) 1.36 925 0.03 (0.18) 0.02 (0.15) 0.66 925 0.01 (0.08) 0.01 (0.11) −1.08 925 0.04 (0.21) 0.05 (0.21) −0.18 925 0.18 (0.39) 0.18 (0.38) 0.12 925 0.17 (0.38) 0.15 (0.36) 0.97 783 0.07 (0.25) 0.10 (0.29) −1.38 783 0.02 (0.14) 0.03 (0.17) −0.94 783 0.01 (0.09) 0.03 (0.16) −1.98 t-statistic (continued) A-5 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) Characteristic Physical and Mental Health (continued) Currently receiving treatment: Bipolar disorder Currently receiving treatment: Conduct disorder Currently receiving treatment: Depression/dysthymia Currently receiving treatment: Drug abuse/dependence Currently receiving treatment: Obsessivecompulsive disorder Currently receiving treatment: Oppositional defiant disorder Currently receiving treatment: Posttraumatic stress disorder Currently receiving treatment: Phobia (social or specific) Currently receiving treatment: Schizophrenia Currently receiving treatment: Other problem/diagnosis Currently not receiving treatment for any condition Doctor prescribed medication for emotional/psychological problem during this incarceration Received the prescribed medication Any victimization (6 months prior to incarceration) Victimization severity prior to incarceration (0–30: >worse) Any victimization (during incarceration) Victimization severity during incarceration (0–36: >worse) Substance Use Ever drank any type of alcoholic beverage Age at first drink Used alcohol 30 days prior to this incarceration Age at last drink if no alcohol 30 days prior Ever used drugs Number of drugs used in lifetime Used drugs 30 days prior to this incarceration Number of drugs used 30 days prior to this incarceration N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 783 0.05 (0.21) 0.06 (0.24) −0.69 783 0.01 (0.07) 0.01 (0.09) −0.47 783 0.06 (0.23) 0.10 (0.29) −2.10 783 0.10 (0.31) 0.09 (0.28) 0.90 783 0.00 (0.00) 0.01 (0.09) −1.74 783 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 783 0.01 (0.11) 0.01 (0.10) 0.31 783 0.00 (0.05) 0.00 (0.05) −0.01 783 0.04 (0.19) 0.03 (0.18) 0.15 783 0.05 (0.22) 0.06 (0.24) −0.68 783 0.72 (0.45) 0.67 (0.47) 1.48 1697 0.13 (0.34) 0.19 (0.39) −3.23 268 0.95 (0.23) 0.96 (0.21) −0.33 1696 0.59 (0.49) 0.58 (0.49) 0.61 1696 3.87 (5.61) 3.75 (5.49) 0.47 1696 0.55 (0.50) 0.54 (0.50) 0.47 1696 2.71 (3.64) 2.88 (4.05) −0.93 1696 1616 0.96 (0.19) 13.71 (3.85) 0.97 (0.17) 13.64 (3.76) −0.80 0.34 1693 0.68 (0.47) 0.67 (0.47) 0.43 479 1697 1697 24.18 (7.41) 0.94 (0.24) 3.39 (2.78) 25.66 (7.86) 0.96 (0.21) 3.84 (2.93) −2.11 −1.67 −3.26 1696 0.66 (0.48) 0.69 (0.46) −1.56 1697 1.37 (1.56) 1.58 (1.75) −2.63 t-statistic (continued) A-6 Appendix A — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) Characteristic Substance Use (continued) Used drugs other than marijuana and steroids 30 days prior to this incarceration Ever used sedatives Age first used sedatives Used sedatives 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used sedatives Ever used tranquilizers Age first used tranquilizers Used tranquilizers 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used tranquilizers Ever used stimulants Age first used stimulants Used stimulants 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used stimulants Ever used pain relievers Age first used pain relievers Used pain relievers 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used pain relievers Ever used methadone Age first used methadone Used methadone 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used methadone Ever used anabolic steroids Age first used anabolic steroids Used anabolic steroids 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used anabolic steroids Ever used marijuana Age first used marijuana Used marijuana 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used marijuana Ever used hallucinogens Age first used hallucinogens Used hallucinogens 30 days prior to this incarceration N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 1696 0.42 (0.49) 0.47 (0.50) −1.92 1695 328 0.18 (0.39) 17.62 (4.24) 0.21 (0.41) 17.13 (4.45) −1.63 1.02 1693 0.06 (0.23) 0.09 (0.29) −2.88 205 1695 461 22.48 (5.32) 0.25 (0.43) 17.93 (4.34) 24.12 (7.09) 0.31 (0.46) 18.47 (5.04) −1.86 −2.86 −1.22 1691 0.08 (0.28) 0.13 (0.33) −2.86 285 1696 298 22.79 (5.62) 0.16 (0.36) 16.66 (4.09) 23.04 (6.47) 0.20 (0.40) 17.05 (4.77) −0.35 −2.31 −0.75 1696 0.07 (0.25) 0.09 (0.29) −1.84 165 1695 454 21.05 (5.30) 0.24 (0.43) 18.21 (4.96) 22.84 (6.91) 0.30 (0.46) 18.53 (5.59) −1.88 −2.78 −0.64 1693 0.11 (0.31) 0.14 (0.34) −1.97 251 1695 132 23.38 (5.46) 0.06 (0.24) 23.71 (8.24) 24.67 (7.15) 0.09 (0.29) 23.10 (6.62) −1.61 −2.28 0.47 1695 0.02 (0.13) 0.02 (0.13) −0.28 103 1696 30 26.95 (8.63) 0.02 (0.13) 17.94 (4.54) 26.27 (7.36) 0.02 (0.13) 19.50 (3.20) 0.43 0.27 −1.07 1696 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 30 1695 1568 18.94 (5.32) 0.92 (0.27) 13.94 (3.15) 21.79 (4.04) 0.94 (0.24) 14.14 (3.33) −1.63 −1.25 −1.24 1694 0.52 (0.50) 0.53 (0.50) −0.76 675 1695 784 23.33 (7.20) 0.43 (0.50) 17.16 (3.45) 23.61 (6.72) 0.49 (0.50) 17.58 (3.95) −0.53 −2.51 −1.59 1694 0.09 (0.28) 0.09 (0.29) −0.30 t-statistic (continued) A-7 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) Characteristic Substance Use (continued) Age last used hallucinogens Ever used cocaine Age first used cocaine Used cocaine 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used cocaine Ever used heroin Age first used heroin Used heroin 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used heroin Ever used amphetamines Age first used amphetamines Used amphetamines 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used amphetamines Ever used inhalants Age first used inhalants Used inhalants 30 days prior to this incarceration Age last used inhalants Received alcohol/drug treatment before this incarceration Current Incarceration and Criminal Historya Duration of incarceration at Wave 1 interview (years) Wave 1 conviction offense(s) category: Person/violent crime Robbery Assault Lethal crime Sex offense Other person/violent crime Wave 1 conviction offense(s) category: Property crime Burglary Theft Car theft Fraud/forgery Other property crime N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) 626 1694 935 20.92 (4.07) 0.53 (0.50) 19.39 (5.32) 21.56 (5.35) 0.58 (0.49) 19.52 (4.90) −1.69 −2.09 −0.39 1694 0.22 (0.42) 0.26 (0.44) −1.77 528 1695 343 24.65 (7.31) 0.18 (0.38) 20.90 (6.13) 24.62 (6.95) 0.23 (0.42) 21.34 (5.62) 0.04 −2.59 −0.68 1695 0.08 (0.27) 0.09 (0.28) −0.83 206 1692 473 26.19 (8.70) 0.26 (0.44) 17.10 (3.76) 24.75 (6.65) 0.30 (0.46) 18.47 (4.81) 1.30 −1.86 −3.47 1690 0.13 (0.33) 0.14 (0.34) −0.55 251 1694 267 22.58 (5.97) 0.15 (0.36) 15.83 (3.91) 23.74 (6.49) 0.16 (0.37) 15.76 (3.34) −1.45 −0.63 0.16 1693 0.01 (0.10) 0.01 (0.08) 0.71 252 18.06 (4.87) 17.34 (4.17) 1.26 1696 0.42 (0.49) 0.41 (0.49) 0.42 1697 2.76 (2.46) 2.26 (2.63) 4.10 1688 0.42 (0.49) 0.40 (0.49) 0.92 1688 1688 1688 1688 1688 0.15 (0.36) 0.19 (0.39) 0.04 (0.21) 0.05 (0.22) 0.03 (0.18) 0.13 (0.33) 0.16 (0.36) 0.03 (0.17) 0.07 (0.25) 0.06 (0.24) 1.28 1.88 1.68 −1.51 −2.46 1688 0.24 (0.43) 0.27 (0.44) −1.35 1688 1688 1688 1688 1688 0.11 (0.31) 0.08 (0.28) 0.03 (0.16) 0.02 (0.15) 0.04 (0.20) 0.12 (0.32) 0.08 (0.27) 0.03 (0.18) 0.05 (0.21) 0.05 (0.21) −0.71 0.43 −0.55 −2.52 −0.50 t-statistic (continued) A-8 Appendix A — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) SVORI Characteristic N Mean (SD) Current Incarceration and Criminal Historya (continued) Wave 1 conviction offense(s) category: 1,688 0.36 (0.48) Drug crime Drug dealing/manufacturing 1,688 0.21 (0.41) Drug possession 1,688 0.22 (0.41) Other drug offense 1,688 0.01 (0.11) Wave 1 conviction offense(s) category: 1,688 0.17 (0.37) Public order crime Wave 1 conviction offense(s) category: 1,688 0.02 (0.13) Other crime Current incarceration for probation or parole 1,695 0.27 (0.44) violation Current incarceration for probation violation 1,695 0.05 (0.22) Current incarceration for parole violation 1,695 0.22 (0.41) Parole violation: Technical violation 459 0.59 (0.49) Parole violation: New crime 459 0.42 (0.49) Age at first arrest 1,685 15.92 (4.78) Number of lifetime arrests 1,586 12.42 (11.45) Number of lifetime convictions 1,658 5.48 (6.05) Number of lifetime convictions/age at 1,658 0.21 (0.24) incarceration Ever locked up in a juvenile correctional 1,696 0.51 (0.50) facility for committing a crime Number of times in juvenile lockup (only 833 3.58 (3.89) those who reported ever being locked up) Number of times in juvenile lockup (all 1,680 1.82 (3.30) respondents) Ever been in jail/prison more than 24 hours 1,694 0.83 (0.38) at one time Number of times sent to prison (only those 1,434 1.45 (1.82) who reported ever having been in prison) Number of times sent to prison (all 1,688 1.20 (1.74) respondents) Any disciplinary infractions during this 1,694 0.65 (0.48) incarceration One disciplinary infraction during this 1,694 0.17 (0.38) incarceration Two or more disciplinary infractions during 1,694 0.47 (0.50) this incarceration Placed in administrative segregation during 1,692 0.45 (0.50) this incarceration Non-SVORI Mean (SD) t-statistic 0.31 (0.46) 2.36 0.15 (0.36) 0.21 (0.41) 0.01 (0.10) 3.34 0.65 0.16 0.22 (0.42) −2.92 0.01 (0.10) 1.21 0.35 (0.48) −3.71 0.06 (0.25) 0.29 (0.45) 0.64 (0.48) 0.37 (0.48) 16.03 (5.09) 13.14 (11.39) 5.70 (6.26) −1.42 −3.18 −1.05 1.03 −0.47 −1.25 −0.73 0.22 (0.25) −0.25 0.49 (0.50) 1.07 3.49 (3.64) 0.35 1.69 (3.07) 0.86 0.87 (0.33) −2.42 1.69 (2.05) −2.35 1.47 (1.99) −2.97 0.56 (0.50) 3.50 0.17 (0.37) 0.36 0.40 (0.49) 3.17 0.40 (0.49) 2.41 (continued) A-9 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit A-2. Respondent characteristics, by group (continued) SVORI Characteristic N Mean (SD) Current Incarceration and Criminal Historya (continued) Current gang member 1,688 0.05 (0.21) Considers gang to be family 92 0.53 (0.51) Relatives are members of the gang 92 0.55 (0.50) Any perpetration of violence (6 months 1,697 0.69 (0.46) prior to incarceration) a Non-SVORI Mean (SD) t-statistic 0.06 (0.24) 0.52 (0.50) 0.58 (0.50) −1.45 0.05 −0.26 0.67 (0.47) 0.80 Results for W1 Conviction Offenses may not sum to 100% because some respondents reported multiple conviction offenses GED=general educational development, SD=standard deviation. A-10 Appendix A — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit A-3. Proportion of respondents who reported needing specific services, by group Service Transitional Services Legal assistance Financial assistance Public financial assistance Public health care insurance Mentor Documents for employment Place to live Transportation Driver’s license Access to clothing/food banks Health Services Medical treatment Mental health treatment AOD treatment Victims’ group for abuse Anger management program Employment/Education/Skills Services Job Job training More education Money management skills Life skills Work on personal relationships Change attitudes on criminal behavior Domestic Violence Services Batterer intervention program Domestic violence support group Child Services Child support payments Modification of child support debt Modification of child custody Parenting skills Child care N SVORI Mean (SD) Non-SVORI Mean (SD) t-statistic 1690 1696 1695 1693 1695 1697 1695 1696 1697 1696 0.45 (0.50) 0.86 (0.35) 0.52 (0.50) 0.75 (0.43) 0.60 (0.49) 0.55 (0.50) 0.49 (0.50) 0.72 (0.45) 0.83 (0.38) 0.60 (0.49) 0.48 (0.50) 0.82 (0.39) 0.54 (0.50) 0.73 (0.45) 0.61 (0.49) 0.56 (0.50) 0.46 (0.50) 0.71 (0.46) 0.81 (0.39) 0.55 (0.50) -1.38 2.61 -0.94 1.19 -0.37 -0.15 1.32 0.59 1.02 2.30 1696 1693 1696 1697 1694 0.56 (0.50) 0.22 (0.42) 0.37 (0.48) 0.04 (0.20) 0.36 (0.48) 0.57 (0.50) 0.29 (0.45) 0.43 (0.50) 0.04 (0.20) 0.38 (0.48) -0.19 -3.09 -2.64 0.22 -0.82 1696 1696 1697 1696 1690 1694 1693 0.80 (0.40) 0.82 (0.39) 0.94 (0.24) 0.71 (0.45) 0.75 (0.43) 0.64 (0.48) 0.64 (0.48) 0.76 (0.43) 0.76 (0.43) 0.92 (0.27) 0.68 (0.47) 0.73 (0.44) 0.64 (0.48) 0.69 (0.46) 1.94 2.62 1.23 1.38 0.96 0.15 -2.12 1694 1695 0.08 (0.27) 0.06 (0.24) 0.08 (0.27) 0.09 (0.28) -0.02 -2.23 995 276 1002 1009 1007 0.45 (0.50) 0.88 (0.33) 0.35 (0.48) 0.60 (0.49) 0.39 (0.49) 0.48 (0.50) 0.86 (0.35) 0.38 (0.49) 0.63 (0.48) 0.39 (0.49) -1.04 0.48 -0.97 -1.11 0.08 SD=standard deviation. A-11 Pre-release Characteristics and Service Receipt among Adult Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Exhibit A-4. Proportion of respondents who reported receiving specific services, by group Variable Label Coordination Services Received needs assessment Received release-specific needs assessment Met with case manager Developed reentry plan Worked with anyone to plan for release Transitional Services Participated in programs to prepare for release Took class specifically for release Received legal assistance Received assistance accessing financial assistance Received assistance accessing public financial assistance Received assistance accessing public health care assistance Received mentoring services Received assistance obtaining documents Received assistance finding transportation Received assistance finding place to live Received assistance getting driver’s license Received assistance accessing clothing/food banks Health Services Received any medical treatment Received dental services Received preventive medical services Received medical treatment for physical health problems Received prescription medicine Received information on accessing physical health care in community Received any mental health treatment for emotional problems Received individual counseling for mental/emotional problems Received group counseling for mental/emotional problems Received information on accessing mental health care in community Received any AOD treatment Participated in Alcoholics Anonymous/Narcotics Anonymous Participated in drug education Received group counseling for AOD problems Received individual counseling for AOD problems N SVORI NonSVORI t-statistic 1690 1678 1694 1663 1695 0.63 (0.48) 0.45 (0.50) 0.49 (0.50) 0.23 (0.42) 0.66 (0.47) 0.40 (0.49) 0.57 (0.50) 0.24 (0.43) 0.66 (0.48) 0.31 (0.46) 7.43 11.61 11.05 14.69 15.22 1696 1695 1697 1697 1696 0.75 (0.43) 0.65 (0.48) 0.12 (0.32) 0.13 (0.34) 0.14 (0.35) 0.51 (0.50) 0.37 (0.48) 0.08 (0.27) 0.04 (0.19) 0.11 (0.31) 10.64 11.89 2.38 7.11 1.81 1695 0.13 (0.34) 0.09 (0.29) 2.46 1697 1693 1696 1697 1696 1696 0.20 (0.40) 0.41 (0.49) 0.19 (0.39) 0.28 (0.45) 0.22 (0.41) 0.21 (0.41) 0.08 (0.27) 0.26 (0.44) 0.12 (0.32) 0.13 (0.33) 0.08 (0.27) 0.11 (0.32) 6.92 6.66 4.30 7.82 8.46 5.54 1691 1696 1687 1690 1690 0.58 (0.49) 0.50 (0.50) 0.37 (0.48) 0.39 (0.49) 0.37 (0.48) 0.55 (0.50) 0.47 (0.50) 0.31 (0.46) 0.33 (0.47) 0.34 (0.47) 1.55 1.38 2.36 2.55 1.38 1696 0.26 (0.44) 0.15 (0.36) 5.37 1675 0.16 (0.36) 0.20 (0.40) -2.17 1675 0.09 (0.29) 0.11 (0.31) -0.92 1674 0.04 (0.20) 0.04 (0.19) 0.22 1687 0.24 (0.43) 0.13 (0.34) 5.65 1696 0.48 (0.50) 0.38 (0.48) 4.44 1696 0.34 (0.48) 0.28 (0.45) 3.01 1696 0.39 (0.49) 1696 0.25 (0.43) 1696 0.14 (0.35) 0.26 (0.44) 0.21 (0.41) 0.14 (0.35) 5.58 1.76 0.08 (continued) A-12 Appendix A — SVORI Adult Male Pre-release Report Exhibit A-4. Proportion of respondents who reported receiving specific services, by group (continued) Variable Label Health Services (continued) Received residential treatment for AOD problems Received methadone Received detox Participated in groups for victims of abuse Participated in anger management program Employment/Education/Skills Services Received any employment services Participated in employment readiness program Participated in job training program Talked to potential employer Given advice about job interviewing Given advice about answering questions about criminal history Given advice about how to behave on the job Given names of people to contact in community to find job Put together a resume Received any educational services Received money management services Received other life skills training Received assistance with personal relationships Received training to change criminal behavior attitudes Domestic Violence Services Participated in batterer intervention programs Participated in domestic violence support groups Child Services Received assistance making child support payments Received assistance modifying child support debt Received assistance modifying child custody Participated in parenting classes Received assistance finding child care N SVORI NonSVORI t-statistic 1690 1695 1696 1696 1696 0.11 (0.32) 0.10 (0.30) 0.00 (0.07) 0.01 (0.08) 0.02 (0.13) 0.02 (0.15) 0.07 (0.25) 0.03 (0.16) 0.34 (0.48) 0.26 (0.44) 1.01 -0.38 -0.81 4.02 3.88 1696 1693 1696 1696 1696 0.37 (0.48) 0.23 (0.42) 0.17 (0.38) 0.15 (0.35) 0.32 (0.47) 0.19 (0.39) 0.09 (0.28) 0.04 (0.20) 0.06 (0.23) 0.14 (0.35) 8.71 8.06 9.16 6.37 9.01 1695 0.30 (0.46) 0.13 (0.34) 8.53 1696 0.31 (0.46) 0.13 (0.34) 9.12 1695 0.27 (0.44) 0.13 (0.33) 7.37 1696 1697 1696 1693 1697 1697 0.24 (0.43) 0.53 (0.50) 0.24 (0.43) 0.42 (0.49) 0.25 (0.43) 0.52 (0.50) 0.10 (0.30) 0.43 (0.50) 0.08 (0.27) 0.21 (0.41) 0.17 (0.37) 0.36 (0.48) 8.01 4.06 9.28 9.84 4.32 6.76 1696 1697 0.05 (0.22) 0.11 (0.31) 0.03 (0.18) 0.06 (0.23) 1.44 3.91 1009 310 1009 1011 1010 0.07 (0.25) 0.02 (0.14) 0.22 (0.42) 0.11 (0.31) 0.04 (0.19) 0.02 (0.15) 0.25 (0.43) 0.15 (0.36) 0.08 (0.27) 0.03 (0.16) 3.70 2.77 1.29 4.04 3.73 AOD=alcohol and other drugs. A-13
