An Outcome Evaluation of a Prison Work Release Program

• Author: Grant Duwe
• Published date: 01 August 2015
• Date: 01 August 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0887403414524590
• Subject Matter: Articles

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2015, Vol. 26(6) 531 –554

© 2014 SAGE Publications

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0887403414524590

cjp.sagepub.com

Article

An Outcome Evaluation

of a Prison Work Release

Program: Estimating Its

Effects on Recidivism,

Employment, and Cost

Avoidance

Grant Duwe1

Abstract

This study adds to the relatively limited and mostly outdated work release literature

by evaluating the effectiveness of a Minnesota prison work release program. A

retrospective quasi-experimental design was used to assess the impact of work release

on recidivism, employment, and cost avoidance among 3,570 offenders released from

Minnesota prisons between 2007 and 2010. Propensity score matching was used to

minimize observable selection bias. Work release significantly increased the hazard

of returning to prison for a technical violation, although it significantly reduced, albeit

modestly, the risk of reoffending with a new crime. It did not have an impact on

hourly wage, but it significantly increased the odds that participants found a job, the

total hours they worked, and the total wages they earned. Work release produced

an estimated cost avoidance benefit of $1.25 million overall, which amounts to nearly

$700 per participant.

Keywords

work release, prison, employment, recidivism, cost-benefit analysis

Introduction

Major criminological theories have long recognized the potential importance of

employment as a protective factor against crime. Strain theory suggests, for example,

1Minnesota Department of Corrections, St. Paul, USA

Corresponding Author:

Grant Duwe, Research Director, Minnesota Department of Corrections, 1450 Energy Park Drive, Suite

200, St. Paul, MN 55108-5219, USA.

Email: grant.duwe@state.mn.us

524590CJPXXX10.1177/0887403414524590Criminal Justice Policy ReviewDuwe

research-article2014

532 Criminal Justice Policy Review 26(6)

that employment mitigates strain by reducing economic need (Agnew, 1986), whereas

social control theory argues that work expands informal social control by giving indi-

viduals a greater stake in conformity and involvement in conventional activities

(Sampson & Laub, 1993). Social learning theory holds that associating with others

who are employed increases the likelihood that individuals will develop or maintain

pro-social values, beliefs, and attitudes (Akers, 1998), whereas rational choice theory

suggests that work curbs crime by increasing the perceived benefits of conventional

behavior (Freeman, 1996). Consistent with these theoretical perspectives, existing

research indicates individuals are less likely to commit crime when they work more

often (Uggen, 1999) and have employment that is stable (Crutchfield & Pitchford,

1997), is considered satisfying (Uggen, 1999), and is perceived as having career

potential (Huiras, Uggen, & McMorris, 2000).

Employment has also been identified as a recidivism risk factor (or criminogenic

need) among individuals who have been convicted of criminal offenses (Andrews,

Bonta, & Wormith, 2006). The principles of effective correctional intervention suggest

that providing educational and vocational programming to undereducated, higher-risk

offenders who lack legitimate work histories will lower recidivism by increasing their

odds of finding and maintaining employment. Nevertheless, the results from the sur-

prisingly small number of studies examining the efficacy of offender employment

programming have not been overly promising. In their meta-analysis of correctional

programming, Wilson, Gallagher, and MacKenzie (2000) reported a negative associa-

tion between correctional work/industry programs and recidivism, but the effect was

not statistically significant due to the small number of treatment/comparison group

contrasts (four) they analyzed for this type of programming. In their meta-analysis of

eight community-based employment program evaluations, Visher, Winterfield, and

Coggeshall (2005) concluded that community employment programs do not have a

significant effect on recidivism. However, Visher et al. cautioned against generalizing

these findings to all employment programs for former prisoners due to the lack of

contemporary evaluations combined with wide differences among the offenders who

participated in these programs.

As evidenced by the recent evaluation of Minnesota’s EMPLOY program (Duwe,

2012), prisoner employment programming can be effective in increasing employment

and reducing recidivism. In contrast to programs that provide services only in prison

or the community, EMPLOY offers a continuum of employment programming by

delivering services in both the institution and the community. For example, EMPLOY

staff helps participants during the final 60 to 90 days prior to their release from prison

by searching for job leads based on their vocational skills, making phone calls to

“felon-friendly” employers, and addressing issues such as skills assessments, resumes,

job searching techniques, and interviewing skills. On their release from prison,

EMPLOY participants receive a portfolio that includes copies of their resume, certifi-

cations, and job leads. EMPLOY staff continues to provide participants with employ-

ment assistance for up to 1 year following their release from prison by maintaining

regular contact and helping with job leads and resume maintenance. The findings indi-

cated that EMPLOY significantly reduced the risk of recidivism, elevated the odds