Choose an anticrime/prevention program to evaluate.
The program that I have chosen for this discussion is the County Reentry Program, which is a
program that multiple counties throughout NY State actively participate in. According to a NY State Map
that outlines all the counties throughout the state, the Country Re-entry Task Forces are in the Capital
District, three counties in the Central New York and 3 in Western New York, 2 in Long Island, 5 in the
Mid-Hudson, and then 3 in NYC (Division of Criminal Justice Services, n.d.). New York state created this
program, as well as the task forces to help facilitate smoother transitions for those who are reintegrating
back into the community (DOCCS, n.d.). Examples of the services this program provides are resource
referrals for housing, mental health treatment, medical services, as well as housing, employment,
mentoring, just to name a few. This program does offer far more services alongside the ones briefly
mentioned.
For example, in Schenectady County, this county was able to provide a total of sixteen emergency
shelter beds specifically for individuals who are in the process of re-entering into society and who are
unhoused, or homeless (Division of Criminal Justice Services, 2024). Additionally, the re-entry task force,
alongside this, was able to help provide bags of winter coats to who’s involved with the criminal justice
system, their families, as well as other family members to help keep them warm during the winter months
(Division of Criminal Justice Services, 2024). While these examples may not be an overall example of
each phase, step, or service provided to those individuals who receive assistance from this county
program and/or task force, it does show that this program provides services and support that cover basis
and simple needs, to more complex needs.
There are multiple qualifications individuals must meet to receive assistance from the County Re-
Entry Program / Task Force. According to the CRFT Pamphlet (2022), the program can help:
1. “Moderate-to high-risk individuals assessed as Supervision Level 1, 2, or 3 by DOCCS;
2. Women with high service needs.
3. Individuals who have been incarcerated for 20+ years.
4. Individuals who have served their full sentence are released without supervision.
5. Teens and young adults on parole and/or recently released from OCFS.
6. And finally, individuals with mental illness, severe medical issues, those who are
developmentally delayed, or those with hearing, visual, or physical impairments”. (p. 2).
Discuss whether the chosen program has empirical support or not.
County Re-entry programs, also identified as CRFT’s in present literature and research, appear to
have empirical support, but struggle to obtain the status of being evidence-based; additionally, many
struggle to prove efficiency, as well as prove they help with a reduction in recidivism, risk for re-offense,
as each community and each offender will have his/her/or its own needs; making re-entry a rather
complex path.
If there is empirical support, please cite the articles and give a short summary of the article.
CSG Justice Center Staff.(2018). Reentry Programs and the Researchers Who Evaluate Them: What it
Takes to Build an Effective Partnership. The National Reentry Resource Center. https://csgjustice
center.org/2018/09/17/reentry-programs-and-the-researchers-who-evaluate-them-what-it-takes-to-
build-an-effective-partnership/.
This article discusses what steps are being taken so that counties and program evaluators can
enhance their insight into the effectiveness of their reentry programs, what the effective strategies are, and
how this data can improve their current programs. This article discusses the vital need for collaboration
between practitioners and evaluators, and how by collaborating, these professionals can develop a more
efficient understanding of their program environment, how to strengthen their programs, and how to
improve the areas that need improvement.
Martin, E. and Garcia, M. (2022). Reentry Research at NIJ: Providing Robust Evidence for High-Stakes
Decision-Making. National Institute of Justice (NIJ). https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/reentry-
Research-nij-providing-robust-evidence-high-stakes-decision-making.
This article discusses the research that NIJ Is conducting regarding re-entry programs. These
authors, in their research, discuss the importance of successful re-entry programs, and the impacts that
effective programs can have. According to Martine and Garcia (2022), individuals who are reentering
society have unique needs, and these needs go unmet and unaddressed prior to their release, or during the
actual re-entry process. The authors follow this statement by providing a discussion on the barriers to
one’s re-entry, as some barriers can be common among individual re-entering, while other barriers can be
unique to that one individual. Present literature and research, among many articles, demonstrate the trend
of how re-entry needs are both complex and will vary from individual to individual, community to
community. Next, these authors discuss the panacea of no re-entry, followed by assessing risks, and a
discussion randomized control trials and even themes of ongoing research pertaining to re-entry
programs.
Sells, D., Curtis, A., Abdur-Raheem, J., Klimczak, M., Barber, C., Meaden, C., Hasson, J., Fallon, P., and
Emigh-Guy, M, Vol. XX, No. X: 1-20. Criminal Justice and Behavior. DOI: 10.1177/0093854820
901562.
Mentorship is one form of support provided in the County Re-Entry Program in NY state, and the
authors of this article discuss peer-mentoring. And how it assists with lowering recidivism within
communities. The authors begin their discussion with a literature review, methodology and participants
for their research, followed by the different procedures and phases that are seen in both prerelease and in
reentry programs. Next, they discuss relevant information and an emphasis on REACH programs,
followed by the overall results of their research study. Further, their discussion portion discusses how
mentorship can address and repairing the gaps that are seen in individuals relating to learned social
behaviors, just as interpersonal relationships and the health of those relationships are addressed with
mentors and with the mentees who are participating in re-entry programs.
Impact Evaluation(s).
Impact evaluations are known to be time consuming, thus a fair amount of time is needed to
conduct accurate and effective impact evaluation, especially when it comes to re-entry programs. When
applied to re-entry programs, these programs will need to have a specialized research design that has been
implemented, as well as having been able to track the outcomes of the individuals in this re-entry program
over a greater length of time (National Research Council, 2005), which means tracking outcomes of those
individuals in these programs for the long-term, not the short-term.
Collaborative Evaluation(s).
On the other hand, collaborative evaluations perhaps could be efficient when evaluating county
re-entry programs. Evaluators conducting a collaborative evaluation assume that active and on-going
engagement between evaluators and program staff will assist with stronger evaluation designs, enhanced
data being obtained, enhanced analysis of the program, and even provide results stakeholders can both
understand and utilize (Vito & Higgins, 2015). For example, if a re-entry program has been implemented
within a county in NY state that is new to this program and task force, the evaluator can see if the
program was put into place as planned, and to see how or if it has changed during its implementation
(Vito & Higgins, 2015). Price-Tucker et al. (2019), demonstrate in their analysis of community-level re-
entry programs, that both the government and local communities cannot exist without one another.
Specifically, these authors state that if both entities work together, they will have increased collaboration
between them, which can help prepare and enhance the community’s ability to help those re-entering
(Price-Tucker et al., 2019).
Biblical Worldview.
Ecclesiastes 4:9-12, “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor; If
either of them calls down, one can help the other up. But pity anyone who falls and has no one to help
them up. Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone? Though
one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken” (New
International Version, 1973/2011, Ecclesiastes 4:9-12). Collaborating can help create effective, efficient
re-entry programs that can help individuals transition back into the community; just as it can help use
create effective prerelease programs that help enhance the success of re-reentry programs, which in turn
help improve the safety of our communities. God would want us to work together, not against each other.
He would rather we forge a path forward that helps many, instead of helping just the few, the powerful, or
the rich. We cannot save everyone, we cannot help everyone, however, we can help many if we simply
work together. Proverbs 27:17, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another” (New
International Version, 1973/2011, Proverbs 27:17).
References
CSG Justice Center Staff.(2018). Reentry Programs and the Researchers Who Evaluate Them: What it
Takes to Build an Effective Partnership. The National Reentry Resource Center. https://csgjustice
center.org/2018/09/17/reentry-programs-and-the-researchers-who-evaluate-them-what-it-takes-to-
build-an-effective-partnership/.
Division of Criminal Justice Services. (n.d.). Country Re-Entry Task Forces Map. New York State. https://
www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/crimenet/ojsa/initiatives/offender_reentry.htm.
Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2024). New York Re-Entry Today, Vol. 13, No. 1. www.criminal
justice.ny.gov.
Martin, E. and Garcia, M. (2022). Reentry Research at NIJ: Providing Robust Evidence for High-Stakes
Decision-Making. National Institute of Justice (NIJ). https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/reentry-
Research-nij-providing-robust-evidence-high-stakes-decision-making.
National Research Council. (2005). Improving Evaluation of Anticrime Programs. Washington, DC:
National Academies Press. ISBN: 0-309-09706-1.
New York State. (n.d.). Country Re-Entry Task Force Program (CRTF) Pamphlet. file:///C:/Users/bluel/
download/Re-entry%20FINAL%202022%20Brochure%2004_27_%20English(1).pdf.
Price-Tucker, A. Zhou, A, Charroux, A. Tenzin, C., Robertson, E., Abdalla, H. Gu, J., Barton, J., Keselj,
M., Bernstein, O. Alexis, P. Odayappan, S., and Escalante, T. (2019). Successful Reentry: A
Community-Level Analysis. The Harvard University Institute of Politics: Criminal Justice Policy
Group. file:///C:/Users/bluel/Downloads/IOP_Policy_Program_2019_Reentry_Policy(1).pdf.
Sells, D., Curtis, A., Abdur-Raheem, J., Klimczak, M., Barber, C., Meaden, C., Hasson, J., Fallon, P., and
Emigh-Guy, M, Vol. XX, No. X: 1-20. Criminal Justice and Behavior. DOI: 10.1177/0093854820
901562.
