Impact and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Maryland Reentry Partnership Initiative

Evaluation of the Maryland Reentry Partnership Initiative Impact and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Maryland Reentry Partnership Initiative John Roman Lisa Brooks Erica Lagerson Aaron Chalfin Bogdan Tereshchenko RESEARCH REPORT January 2007 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Centerresearch for safer communities URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center 2100 M STREET, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20037 www.urban.org The views expressed are those of the authors, and should not be attributed to The Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. This document was prepared under grants from the Maryland Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention and Catholic Charities. Points of view or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the Maryland Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention, Catholic Charities, the Urban Institute, its board, or sponsors. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the many individuals who assisted our efforts in collecting, preparing and analyzing the data used in this study. Rada Moss, Executive Director of the Maryland Reentry Partnership Initiative within Catholic Charities, answered countless questions about the program, as did her predecessor at REP, Tomi Hiers. We benefited greatly from our collaboration with Jeffrey Gersh at the Maryland Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention, whose patience and guidance were critical to the completion of the study. Tom Stough and Bob Gibson at the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services provided invaluable assistance deciphering the data. We are also grateful to staff from the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute who contributed to this report. Michael Kane ably managed the project through its early stages. Courtney Schaeffer conducted site visits for the cost-benefit portion of the study and co-authored the initial cost-benefit report. Caterina Gouvis Roman, Christy Visher and Shelli Rossman offered critical guidance in shaping the final project report. Avi Bhati and Bill Adams supported the data management process. Doug Wissoker and Alex Cowell at RTI, International, provided thoughtful insights to the cost-benefit analysis. Evaluation of the Maryland Reentry Partnership Initiative Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................................................................... II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................... I Overview......................................................................................................................................................................... i MAIN FINDINGS REPORT................................................................................. 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background...................................................................................................................................................................................1 REP Operation..............................................................................................................................................................................2 REP Case Management.................................................................................................................................................................3 The Research Design...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Data................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Dependent Variables–Defining Recidivism...................................................................................................................................4 Sample........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Impact Results................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Bivariate Analysis.........................................................................................................................................................................7 Predictive Analysis.......................................................................................................................................................................8 Regression Models Testing the Impact of REP Participation..............................................................................