Policy Change and Recidivism: The Effects of California’s Realignment and Local Implementation Strategies on Rearrest and Reconviction

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 601-623
Author(s):  
Mia Bird ◽  
Ryken Grattet

California’s 2011 Public Safety Realignment created an unprecedented policy experiment by transferring the authority over lower level felony offenders from the state correctional system to 58 county jail and probation systems. Realignment provides a unique opportunity to examine the ways that correctional policy change can influence recidivism patterns. We examine two questions about policy change and recidivism: “Did realignment affect change in statewide recidivism patterns?” and “Does county-level variation in implementation strategies help account for differences in recidivism across counties?” We find that statewide recidivism rates actually increased somewhat after realignment. However, we also find that offenders released to counties that prioritized reentry services in their implementation of realignment had better post-realignment recidivism outcomes than offenders released to counties that prioritized traditional enforcement methods. We conclude by considering additional steps needed to understand the links between policy change and recidivism outcomes.

2020 ◽  
Vol 738 ◽  
pp. 140195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ning Wang ◽  
Kerrie Mengersen ◽  
Shilu Tong ◽  
Michael Kimlin ◽  
Maigeng Zhou ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (9) ◽  
pp. 1059-1078
Author(s):  
Angela A. Robertson ◽  
Zhou Fang ◽  
Doris Weiland ◽  
George Joe ◽  
Sheena Gardner ◽  
...  

Recidivism, and the factors related to it, remains a highly significant concern among juvenile justice researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. Recent studies highlight the need to examine multiple measures of recidivism as well as conduct multilevel analyses of this phenomenon. Using data collected in a National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)-funded Juvenile Justice-Translational Research on Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System (JJ-TRIALS) cooperative agreement, we examined individual- and site-level factors related to 1-year recidivism among probation youth in 20 sites in five states to answer research questions related to how recidivism rates differ across sites and the relationships between individual-level variables and a county-level concentrated disadvantage measure and recidivism. Our findings of large site differences in recidivism rates, and complex relationships between individual and county-level predictors of recidivism, highlight the need for more nuanced, contextually informed, multilevel approaches in studying recidivism among juveniles.


Medical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare C. Brown ◽  
Jennifer E. Moore ◽  
Holly C. Felix ◽  
M. Kathryn Stewart ◽  
J. Mick Tilford

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 237802312090543 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Elliott ◽  
Phylicia Lee Brown ◽  
Kevin Loughran

One way the U.S. government is responding to the challenges of climate change is by funding the purchase of tens of thousands of flood-prone homes in more than 500 cities and towns across the country. This study provides a nationwide analysis of that program, extending beyond cost-benefit calculations to investigate racial inequities at different scales of local implementation, from county-level adoption, through neighborhood-level participation, to homeowner approval. Statistical analyses indicate that net of local flood damage, population, and incomes, the program disproportionately targets whiter counties and neighborhoods, especially in more urbanized areas where the program now concentrates. Yet it is neighborhoods of color in these areas that have been historically more likely to accept buyouts in greater numbers. The exception is the New York and New Jersey area after Hurricane Sandy. Implications for understanding how racial privilege works through government programs aimed at encouraging environmental adaptation are discussed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 385-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neera K. Goyal ◽  
Emily DeFranco ◽  
Beena D. Kamath-Rayne ◽  
Andrew F. Beck ◽  
Eric S. Hall

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (10) ◽  
pp. 1241-1246 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S. Mandell ◽  
Knashawn H. Morales ◽  
Ming Xie ◽  
Daniel Polsky ◽  
Aubyn Stahmer ◽  
...  

PLoS Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. e1003571
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Stokes ◽  
Dielle J. Lundberg ◽  
Irma T. Elo ◽  
Katherine Hempstead ◽  
Jacob Bor ◽  
...  

Background Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) excess deaths refer to increases in mortality over what would normally have been expected in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several prior studies have calculated excess deaths in the United States but were limited to the national or state level, precluding an examination of area-level variation in excess mortality and excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19. In this study, we take advantage of county-level variation in COVID-19 mortality to estimate excess deaths associated with the pandemic and examine how the extent of excess mortality not assigned to COVID-19 varies across subsets of counties defined by sociodemographic and health characteristics. Methods and findings In this ecological, cross-sectional study, we made use of provisional National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) data on direct COVID-19 and all-cause mortality occurring in US counties from January 1 to December 31, 2020 and reported before March 12, 2021. We used data with a 10-week time lag between the final day that deaths occurred and the last day that deaths could be reported to improve the completeness of data. Our sample included 2,096 counties with 20 or more COVID-19 deaths. The total number of residents living in these counties was 319.1 million. On average, the counties were 18.7% Hispanic, 12.7% non-Hispanic Black, and 59.6% non-Hispanic White. A total of 15.9% of the population was older than 65 years. We first modeled the relationship between 2020 all-cause mortality and COVID-19 mortality across all counties and then produced fully stratified models to explore differences in this relationship among strata of sociodemographic and health factors. Overall, we found that for every 100 deaths assigned to COVID-19, 120 all-cause deaths occurred (95% CI, 116 to 124), implying that 17% (95% CI, 14% to 19%) of excess deaths were ascribed to causes of death other than COVID-19 itself. Our stratified models revealed that the percentage of excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19 was substantially higher among counties with lower median household incomes and less formal education, counties with poorer health and more diabetes, and counties in the South and West. Counties with more non-Hispanic Black residents, who were already at high risk of COVID-19 death based on direct counts, also reported higher percentages of excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19. Study limitations include the use of provisional data that may be incomplete and the lack of disaggregated data on county-level mortality by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and sociodemographic and health characteristics. Conclusions In this study, we found that direct COVID-19 death counts in the US in 2020 substantially underestimated total excess mortality attributable to COVID-19. Racial and socioeconomic inequities in COVID-19 mortality also increased when excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19 were considered. Our results highlight the importance of considering health equity in the policy response to the pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document