Transportation Among Returning Citizens: “You Just Want to Stay Down and Get High”

• Author: Jaya B. Davis,Anne Nordberg,Stephen Mattingly,Mansi Patel,Sarah R. Leat
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211059476
• Published date: 01 April 2023
• Date: 01 April 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211059476

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2023, Vol. 67(5) 546 –566

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X211059476

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Transportation Among

Returning Citizens: “You

Just Want to Stay Down

and Get High”

Jaya B. Davis1, Anne Nordberg1,

Stephen Mattingly1, Mansi Patel1,

and Sarah R. Leat2

Abstract

The United States is releasing more individuals from prisons than ever before.

However, returning citizens face numerous challenges transitioning back into

community life and many communities remain ill-equipped in successfully supporting

them. This study focuses on transportation as in integral component to the success

of returning citizens. Rapid and rigorous qualitative data analysis (RADaR technique)

is applied to interviews (n = 15) with individuals having returned to their community

about the impact of transportation on their reentry. Analysis resulted in three primary

themes; interviewees reinforced existing knowledge of the issues with transportation

disadvantage, transportation is an extension of freedom, and transportation is

directly connected to reentry success. These findings suggest a tiered structure of

transportation freedom for returning citizens. This model of transportation will aid

future researchers and policymakers in considering how to better resource returning

citizens to maximize their success.

Keywords

returning citizens, reentry, transportation disadvantage, RADaR, qualitative research

1University of Texas at Arlington, TX, USA

2University of Memphis, TN, USA

Corresponding Author:

Jaya B. Davis, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Texas at Arlington, UH 362,

Box 19595, TX 76019-0595, USA.

Email: jbdavis@uta.edu

1059476IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X211059476International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyDavis et al.

research-article2021

Davis et al. 547

The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports the U.S. continues to experience a decline in

the correctional population, marking an almost two decades low (Marsuchak &

Minton, 2020). However, 6.5 million persons remain under correctional control, one

out of every 40 U.S. adults. As the number of persons on probation and incarcerated

have decreased over the last decade, the number of persons on parole have increased

(Marsuchak & Minton, 2020). After decades of excessive sentencing policy, we are

releasing more people from prisons than ever before. In fact, over 600,000 individuals

return to their communities from prison (returning citizens) each year in the United

States (Carson & Golinelli, 2013).

Returning citizens face numerous challenges transitioning to community life. While

there are many ways to assess the success or failure of reentry, academics, politicians,

and policymakers often consider rates of recidivism. The Bureau of Justice Statistics

reports five of every six (83%) released state prisoners are rearrested in the nine years

following release (Alper et al., 2018). Further, more than 40% of those released return to

prison within three years, a phenomenon known as the “revolving door” (Pew Charitable

Trust, 2011). These recidivism numbers include those who have been arrested or incar-

cerated due to violating their conditions of living in the community. National data count-

ing the number of individuals in jail because of probation or parole violations is

unavailable, but evidence indicates that remands for violations of conditions of commu-

nity supervision may exceed one-third of some jail populations and one in four people in

state prisons are incarcerated as a result of supervision violations (Prison Policy Initiative,

2018). Statistics like these are discouraging and further spur the conversation to identify

“what works” and how all those involved in criminal justice can improve.

Individual responsibility during reentry represents the easiest variable to implicate

when considering failures to reentry. In fact, Ward and Merlo (2016) found that correc-

tional workers often identified the behavioral characteristics of returning citizens (sub-

stance abuse, criminal associations, lack of motivation, failure to take responsibility) as

the most significant barriers to reentry success. The implication of personal responsibil-

ity and the difficulty in developing reasonable standards reduces the need to identify and

correct structural barriers to success (access to affordable housing, quality employment

for criminal record holders, long-term mental and physical health care).

Although transportation equity can be defined in a variety of ways, the broader

societal-level structural inequities have made specific populations (including return-

ing citizens) face disproportionate transportation barriers (Litman, 2002). This study

focuses on transportation as an integral component to the success of these individuals.

By interviewing individuals having returned to their communities about the impact of

transportation on their reentry, we use their lens to identify how transportation facili-

tates or stymies success. Transportation is viewed here as a structural element as well

as having an individual impact. Transportation disadvantage may further aggravate

individual barriers by making access to programming aimed at addressing personal

challenges (substance abuse, mental health, work readiness) more difficult. Further,

without access to regular and reliable transportation, the chance of parole violations

increases due to noncompliance with supervision requirements (e.g., failure to report

to a scheduled meeting or program).