For-profit and non-profit entities are generally eligible

to apply for government guaranteed loans and to

contract with the government agencies to provide
transitional housing for specific target populations
such as ex-offenders, homeless veterans, recovering
alcoholics, abused women and recovering drug addicts.
For-profit entities are generally barred from government
and private foundation grant eligibility by federal law
and IRS rules. Some states, such as New Jersey, even
bar for-profit entities from obtaining halfway house
contracts. Therefore, if you plan to operate a for-profit
entity, check with the appropriate state agency, such as
your Bureau of Prisons, to see about your state's
eligibility requirements for obtaining a contract to run a
halfway house.

Halfway Houses and Community

Corrections

Make a plan to guide your efforts. Research your

community, assess the need for your program and write
a summary that explains your program and its history. If
your program is in the planning stages, develop a
proposal detailing the program you wish to start and the
services you will provide to ex-convicts. Be prepared to
describe your program to potential funders.
Develop a website so that potential funders can find
your programs. Donors can make online donations
through your website, and agencies that might need
your services will find your halfway house in an
Internet search.
Visit the Department of Justice Reentry website for
information about reentry initiatives and funding for
halfway houses. The website has a page with links to
state programs and funding opportunities.
Visit grants.gov and search for grants that support
halfway houses, community corrections and other
programs related to the Second Chance Act. Search for
grants that support specific services, such as
employment assistance or substance abuse services.
Identify foundations, local charities and civic
organizations whose grant focus areas include services
to ex-convicts, halfway houses and community
corrections. Start your search at the Foundation Center
website. Contact the organizations or visit their
websites to learn about eligibility criteria and
application processes.
Contact local community foundations. They manage
charitable funds for individuals, foundations and
corporations and can identify donors that might be
interested in funding halfway houses or services to exconvicts.

Government Grant Limitations

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration,

federal and state governments do not provide grants for
starting a business, paying off debt and covering
operational expenses.
Government grants generally fund specific industries,
target populations and target programs.
In the case of halfway houses, government grants may
be available to fund, say, innovative re-entry programs
for ex-offenders, transitional housing for abused women
and recovery programs for recovering addictions.
Implicit in all government grants for halfway houses is
the requirement that your halfway house be an ongoing
entity rather than a startup.

Types of Government Grants for Halfway

Houses

The primary federal agencies that fund grants for halfway

houses are:
1. the U.S. Justice Department,
2. the Department of Housing and Urban
Government Funding
Development and
3.
the Department of Labor.
The only way to get a government halfway house grant is to
These
agencies,
as all other federal agencies, fund two types
be recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)
(3) nonprofit faith-based or community-based organization. of grants:
1. formula grants and
FBOs are loosely defined by the federal government as
2. discretionary grants.
connected with an organized faith community. CBOs are
Formula grants, also called block and
small neighborhood non-profit organizations that are
entitlement grants, are generally allocated to
located in the same zip code as the people they serve. You
various state agencies based on formulas. In turn,
can download the 501(c)(3) application at the IRS website.
state agencies award sub-grants to faith-based and
Even with non-profit status, there are limited resources and
community-based halfway houses for specific
plenty of rules to navigate.
programs and specific target populations. The
Types
federal Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment
-- or SAPT -- Block Grant is an example of a block
There are three main types of government funding for
grant relevant to halfway houses.
halfway houses:
With discretionary grants, federal agencies can
1. contract for services,
exercise judgment in selecting grant recipients
2. government-guaranteed loans and
through a competitive grant process.
3. government grants.

Sources for Government Grant Information

The principal federal websites for listing all government
grant opportunities and announcements are
1. Grants.gov and
2. the Catalog of Domestic Federal Assistance.
Grants.gov is the general website for all federal agencies to
list discretionary grant opportunities.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance lists all federal
block grants available to state and local governments that
could have relevance to halfway houses. In addition to these
resources, check with the relevant state and local agencies
in your location to learn about the grant opportunities that
are funded directly by state and local agencies.

Applying for Government Grants

Refer to the Grants.gov website for the specific steps to take
when applying for government grant opportunities online.
Although these steps may appear simplistic, they are not.
You may want to consider securing the help of a
professional grant-writing service such as the
Grantsmanship Center to learn precisely how to win
government grants.

mandated to provide onsite counseling. Such services can

be provided by a local church or other community
organizations. The only halfway houses that need to be
licensed are those that are considered treatment facilities.

Zoning
Depending on where you decide to place your halfway
house, you may have to acquire the proper zoning license.
Your county board's zoning commission will mark the
house as a business and may limit the number of people
allowed in any one room and any one residence. The
commission may also mandate which structural
adaptations--such as sprinkler lines and wheelchairaccessible entrances and parking spaces--need to be made
before your halfway house is operable.

Starting a Reentry Initiative

Starting a reentry initiative can be a daunting task. The

overall scope of reentry can overwhelm and paralyze a
government official, community leader or advocate who is
eager to improve prisoner reentry in their community. A
critical first step is getting the right people together to
Categorization
assess the problem and collecting the right information to
Halfway houses are categorized depending on what type of inform your strategy. In some jurisdictions, this may mean
people you would like to help. These temporary homes
convening people for the first time and realizing that some
come in different kinds. Some help those recently released
key data have never been tracked, whereas in other
from prison; others house people overcoming drug and
jurisdictions, it may mean identifying several existing state
alcohol addictions. You could also start a halfway house that and local reentry initiatives, determining their relationship
caters to people who have mental disabilities, or you could to each other and whether they need to be restructured, and
focus your home to give youth a roof over their heads. The learning from research already collected.
reasons youth need a halfway house vary, but most youth
halfway houses are orphans, runaways or victims of child
A few of the critical steps include:
abuse.

Operation
Every house needs rules, including halfway houses. Before
your halfway house opens, you need to decide how many
residents you want to house at any one time and at what
location you would like your business to be in. You should
also make a list of house rules that you want your residents
to abide by. It is a good idea to have what you want to
accomplish mapped out to ensure a greater possibility for
success. An organized plan for the halfway house would
also make a great presentation if you plan to apply for a
loan or grant to get your business started.

Americans with Disabilities Act

Though it is not the case for all temporary homes, most
halfway houses operate without a license or a permit. The
Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Act
Amendment make it illegal for anyone to discriminate
against the people who live in halfway houses. Owners,
operators and tenants are also protected from prejudice.
Also, most halfway houses that are not licensed are not

1. Encouraging Collaboration among Stakeholders

The first step to developing a reentry initiative must be
getting the appropriate people to the table and eliciting a
commitment to working together on a particular aspect of
the issue.
a. Recognize the complexities of the different
systems.
Exploratory discussions with leaders in any one of the
health or social services systems, like mental health,
housing, and workforce development, will sooner or later
turn to their capacity to serve people released from prison
and jail. Before getting representatives of these groups to
the table, it is important to be familiar with the culture,
funding, philosophy, service-delivery structure, and
oversight of each system. Without such an appreciation,
initial discussions are unlikely to be constructive or
productive. Brief sketches in the sidebar, "Sample
Challenges to Understanding Service Systems Essential to
Re-Entry," illustrate some of the complexities of various
service systems that potential re-entry partners must

appreciate to increase the odds of a successful early

meeting. These are intended only as examples, and do not
represent either all the complexities of the specified
systems, or the universe of systems that are critical to reentry. (See Elements of Effective Social Systems, for a
system-by-system outline of some of the key components of
several social systems whose participation is central to reentry efforts in any community.) And just as service systems
may be mysterious to criminal justice practitioners, the
criminal justice system can confuse service system partners.
These partners may not know the difference between
probation and parole or prison and jail, for example, or may
assume that a police chief or judge can speak for a
jurisdiction's entire criminal justice system.
Time spent studying any of these systems will soon make
apparent that each is a patchwork of programs, services, and
funding structures, and, as in the case of criminal justice,
the word "system" may very much be a misnomer for each.
Willingness on the part of those spearheading a re-entry
initiative to demonstrate a deeper appreciation of the
challenges facing organizations that could become partners
on the initiative will encourage critical representatives to
come to the table with greater understanding and sense of
cooperation.

among some organizations whose role is critical to a

prisoner's safe and successful return to the community.
In these situations, it will be useful to engage some
leadership in the re-entry effort. Appealing to someone who
is both interested in prisoner re-entry and who exercises
influence over the staff, organization, or agency hesitant to
invest any time in a discussion around this issue can be a
helpful way to get that individual or entity to the re-entry
table. The chief executive of a jurisdiction--such as the
governor, county executive, or mayor--is obviously
particularly well situated to exert such influence. It is also
difficult to turn down a request from state legislators, city
council members, or judges, whose authority is seen to span
beyond any particular agency.

A state legislature can play a role by creating an oversight

commission for a re-entry initiative. Many states have
legislated the creation of such commissions to coordinate
work groups on sentencing. A few have established more
general commissions or study committees to evaluate and
develop recommendations for improving prison population
management and other aspects of the criminal justice
system, which necessarily includes strategies around reentry. For example, the Maine legislature created the
Commission to Improve the Supervision, Management, and
b. Identify key stakeholders and engage them in a
Incarceration of Prisoners, which is charged with making
discussion regarding reentry.
recommendations to reduce prison and jail populations, to
At the state level, it is relatively easy to identify lead
reduce corrections costs and recidivism, and to improve
authorities for distinct systems, such as mental health, labor, public safety. [3] Similar directives setting up committees
and workforce, although responsibility for one aspect of
to study prison population management were passed in New
prisoner re-entry, such as mental health, rarely seems
Hampshire and South Carolina. [4]
concentrated exclusively under one person's authority. [1]
Determining who to engage at the local level, when a
It is also important to appeal to the person whose
jumble of groups, individuals, and organizations has a stake involvement in the re-entry initiative is sought in terms that
in re-entry in each city or county, is likely to be particularly are particularly and individually compelling. To that end,
vexing.
knowing what issues are most likely to resonate with the
target audience is essential (e.g., revitalizing a particular
The preceding recommendation explained the value of
neighborhood, improving communities' confidence in the
becoming familiar with the different systems that need to be criminal justice system, lowering rates of HIV infection,
represented in the initiative. That research should help point decreasing unemployment, increasing community safety,
to the various organizations that play key roles in a system, postponing the construction of a new correctional facility).
such as the Workforce Investment Board, which runs the
(See Policy Statement 3, Incorporating Re-Entry into
local One-Stop. At the local level, community audits can
Organizations' Missions and Work Plans, Recommendation
help generate an inventory of relevant groups and
c, for more on how government officials can appeal to
individuals. [2] Unfortunately, even an initial list of target potential partner agencies in the community in terms
constituencies and familiarity with their respective systems directly relevant to those agencies.)
does not guarantee an audience receptive to a joint initiative
around prisoner re-entry.
Careful thought should be given to who will lead the initial
planning discussions. As indicated earlier, people whose
Some of these key organizations and agencies, at both the
authority is seen to span multiple organizations or agencies
state and local level, might immediately recognize the value can be particularly effective leaders of an initiative in which
of participating in a prisoner re-entry initiative, or they may success depends on extensive collaboration. Inevitably, at
already be addressing this issue. Almost always, however,
least some participants will approach a planning discussion
there will be at least some reluctance to exploring the
warily, and will assess who is trying to situate themselves
possibility of working together around prisoner re-entry
for a contract or grant, which constituencies are favored by

virtue of their representation in the initial planning

meetings, or what particular issue area is likely to be
spotlighted. For these reasons, the chairperson's role is
particularly important. In some jurisdictions, assuaging
suspicions of various interest groups is best achieved by
designating two co-chairs of the initiative.

a particular subgroup of people released from prison

(e.g., people released to four zip codes in one
metropolitan area, female offenders, or
people released to the community without any
postrelease supervision).
In the process of determining what this focus should be, the
question of what issues are most likely to generate political
Example: Family Life Center (RI)
traction and resources should be taken into account. It is
Planning discussions around prisoner re-entry, which
also important to consider what issues will engage
resulted in the establishment of the Family Life Center,
particular individuals or groups whose investment in the
were chaired by two elected officials: A state legislator and initiative will make it both viable and credible. Once an
a city councilman, both with extensive credibility in the
initial focus is identified, the stakeholder will need data,
African-American and Latino communities and among their which can provide a base of knowledge from which a plan
peers in General Assembly and City Hall, represented
for moving forward can be developed.
individuals from two neighborhoods in Providence that
receive disproportionately large numbers of people released
from the state correctional facility.
2. Developing a Knowledge Base
Once the appropriate decision makers are convened, the
1. Even determining which agencies at the state level are
next step is to build a knowledge base about the people
relevant to a re-entry effort can be somewhat tricky.
affected by reentry, the inventory of community resources
Responsibilities for some issues can span several agencies. available to meet individual and communal needs and to
For example, enrollment in Medicaid, which in many states ensure safety, and the laws and policies that govern aspects
can be triggered by participation in SSI or SSDI programs, of reentry in their particular jurisdiction.
contemplates issues not just under the jurisdiction of the
state Medicaid agency, but also the agency responsible for
a. Understand who is being released from prison.
enrolling disabled people in these other public assistance
In order to design and implement reentry initiatives that
programs
meet the needs of returning prisoners, as well as the public
2. When conducted effectively, community audits generate safety concerns of the communities at risk, policymakers
an inventory of organizations large and small, including
must identify the characteristics of the reentry population.
those that serve isolated, ethnic, or low-income
More...
communities. Clearinghouses established for particular
systems, the yellow pages, the news media, and staff can be b. Identify what state and local policies influence and
valuable sources for such an audit. For more information on govern re-entry.
how to conduct a community audit in one relevant system,
Developers of reentry initiatives should become familiar
see Workforce Learning Strategies, Conducting a
with local laws, regulations, and various agencies' policies
Community Audit: Assessing the Workforce Development
and procedures, so that they may align initiatives within
Needs And Resources of Your Community (U.S.
those parameters or determine which ones should be
Department of Labor, Employment and Training
modified. More...
Administration, 2000-08-01)
c. Identify where released prisoners are returning, and
c. Define the scope of the problem.
understand the characteristics and service capacities of
Convening a broad range of stakeholders to diagnose
those communities.
existing problems regarding prisoner re-entry is an essential Policymakers should seek to inform the development of any
first step to launching a re-entry initiative. Nevertheless,
reentry initiative with data such as the locations to which
rather than galvanizing action, the results of such a
prisoners return in their jurisdiction and where reentry
meeting--typically a laundry list of issues that is hopelessly services and resources and supervision offices are sited.
long--frequently seem paralyzing. While most, if not all, of More...
these issues will need to be tackled at some point, they
cannot be confronted simultaneously.
d. Understand why released prisoners are reoffending.
Not all released prisoners re-offend at the same rate, and
To establish an initial project, the group should consider
understanding why some re-offend and others do not can
various ways to narrow the discussion, such as focusing on: inform the design of effective re-entry initiatives. More...
a particular issue area within prisoner re-entry (e.g.,
housing) or
e. Examine how prisoners are prepared for re-entry,
supervised, and aided in the transition from prison to
community.

In order to assess returning prisoners' needs and how best to

address them, it is important to obtain information about
Engage key stakeholders in a joint venture regarding
access to programs and services both in prison or jail as
prisoner re-entry and focus the group's attention on a
well as within the community. More...
particular aspect of the issue.
Source: The Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council:
Charting the Safe and Successful Return of Prisoners to the
Community , Council of State Governments Justice Center
(2005)
Key Resources
The Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council: Charting the
Safe and Successful Return of Prisoners to the Community,
Council of State Governments Justice Center (2005)
Part I of the Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council
enumerates many of the considerations and challenges that
policymakers seeking to establish any new re-entry
program, policy, or practice must address to ensure that it
has a solid foundation.
Ready4Reentry: Prisoner Reentry Toolkit for Faith-Based
and Community Initiatives, U.S. Department of Labor
(2006)
This toolkit, based on the Ready4Work model, is a
promising practices guide for small to medium sized faithbased and community organizations interested in starting or
bolstering their reentry efforts.
Reentry Mapping Network (RMN), The Urban Institute
The Reentry Mapping Network is a nationwide partnership
between the Urban Institute and organizations in 15 cities
working to map and analyze prisoner reentry and related
issues in their communities. The website provides
information on reentry mapping and the RMN, along with
resources and sample maps for anyone interested in
developing a reentry mapping project.
Reentry Partnerships: A Guide for States & Faith-Based and
Community Organizations, Council of State Governments
Justice Center (2008)
Faith-based and community organizations provide critical
reentry services in prisons and jails and have extensive
networks to link people to resources that can help them
reenter communities in positive ways. This guide provides
recommendations to improve collaboration between
government agencies and faith-based and community
organizations.
Planning and Assessing a Law Enforcement Reentry
Strategy, Council of State Governments Justice Center
(2008)
Planning and Assessing a Law Enforcement Reentry
Strategy integrates information on effective law
enforcement reentry practices with an interactive
assessment to form a toolkit for designing and evaluating
reentry approaches involving law enforcement agencies.
=====
Policy Statement 1: Encouraging Collaboration Among
Stakeholders

Every policy statement in this report assumes some degree

of joint-venturing between at least two independent
organizations or agencies. Indeed, the single most important
common denominator shared among jurisdictions that have
launched a successful re-entry initiative is that some
collaboration between representatives of at least two
independent organizations preceded the development and
implementation of the program or policy. Accordingly, the
first step to developing a re-entry initiative must be getting
the appropriate people to the table and eliciting a
commitment to working together on a particular aspect of
the issue.
It is not always obvious, however, who are the relevant (let
alone key) actors that need to be engaged to make the reentry initiative a success. And the mere identification of
these stakeholders does not translate into their engagement.
Determining how to persuade, or even compel, them to
become invested is often an especially complex task.
The following recommendations suggest ways to clear this
initial hurdle. Of course, while preliminary discussions
among leaders of distinct organizations are a starting point
and a precursor to cooperation and coordination between
systems, they do not, in and of themselves, translate into
strong partnerships that can withstand changes in leadership
and personnel and sustain the re-entry initiative. [1]
Establishing that degree of collaboration is, without
question, a core challenge in developing a productive reentry initiative, and it is explored in more detail in Policy
Statement 5, Promoting Systems Integration and
Coordination.
Recommendations:
A. Recognize the complexities of the different systems.
B. Identify key stakeholders and engage them in a
discussion regarding re-entry.
C. Define the scope of the problem.
======
Policy Statement 1B
Engage key stakeholders in a joint venture regarding
prisoner re-entry and focus the group's attention on a
particular aspect of the issue.
Recommendation B: Identify key stakeholders and engage
them in a discussion regarding re-entry.
At the state level, it is relatively easy to identify lead
authorities for distinct systems, such as mental health, labor,

and workforce, although responsibility for one aspect of

prisoner re-entry, such as mental health, rarely seems
concentrated exclusively under one person's authority.1
Determining who to engage at the local level, when a
jumble of groups, individuals, and organizations has a stake
in re-entry in each city or county, is likely to be particularly
vexing.

study prison population management were passed in New

Hampshire and South Carolina. [4]

It is also important to appeal to the person whose

involvement in the re-entry initiative is sought in terms that
are particularly and individually compelling. To that end,
knowing what issues are most likely to resonate with the
target audience is essential (e.g., revitalizing a particular
The preceding recommendation explained the value of
neighborhood, improving communities' confidence in the
becoming familiar with the different systems that need to be criminal justice system, lowering rates of HIV infection,
represented in the initiative. That research should help point decreasing unemployment, increasing community safety,
to the various organizations that play key roles in a system, postponing the construction of a new correctional facility).
such as the Workforce Investment Board, which runs the
(See Policy Statement 3, Incorporating Re-Entry into
local One-Stop. At the local level, community audits can
Organizations' Missions and Work Plans, Recommendation
help generate an inventory of relevant groups and
c, for more on how government officials can appeal to
individuals. 2 Unfortunately, even an initial list of target
potential partner agencies in the community in terms
constituencies and familiarity with their respective systems directly relevant to those agencies.)
does not guarantee an audience receptive to a joint initiative
around prisoner re-entry.
Careful thought should be given to who will lead the initial
planning discussions. As indicated earlier, people whose
Some of these key organizations and agencies, at both the
authority is seen to span multiple organizations or agencies
state and local level, might immediately recognize the value can be particularly effective leaders of an initiative in which
of participating in a prisoner re-entry initiative, or they may success depends on extensive collaboration. Inevitably, at
already be addressing this issue. Almost always, however,
least some participants will approach a planning discussion
there will be at least some reluctance to exploring the
warily, and will assess who is trying to situate themselves
possibility of working together around prisoner re-entry
for a contract or grant, which constituencies are favored by
among some organizations whose role is critical to a
virtue of their representation in the initial planning
prisoner's safe and successful return to the community.
meetings, or what particular issue area is likely to be
spotlighted. For these reasons, the chairperson's role is
In these situations, it will be useful to engage some
particularly important. In some jurisdictions, assuaging
leadership in the re-entry effort. Appealing to someone who suspicions of various interest groups is best achieved by
is both interested in prisoner re-entry and who exercises
designating two co-chairs of the initiative.
influence over the staff, organization, or agency hesitant to
invest any time in a discussion around this issue can be a
Example: Family Life Center (RI)
helpful way to get that individual or entity to the re-entry
table. The chief executive of a jurisdiction--such as the
Planning discussions around prisoner re-entry, which
governor, county executive, or mayor--is obviously
resulted in the establishment of the Family Life Center,
particularly well situated to exert such influence. It is also
were chaired by two elected officials: A state legislator and
difficult to turn down a request from state legislators, city
a city councilman, both with extensive credibility in the
council members, or judges, whose authority is seen to span African-American and Latino communities and among their
beyond any particular agency.
peers in General Assembly and City Hall, represented
individuals from two neighborhoods in Providence that
A state legislature can play a role by creating an oversight
receive disproportionately large numbers of people released
commission for a re-entry initiative. Many states have
from the state correctional facility.
legislated the creation of such commissions to coordinate
work groups on sentencing. A few have established more
1. Even determining which agencies at the state level are
general commissions or study committees to evaluate and
relevant to a re-entry effort can be somewhat tricky.
develop recommendations for improving prison population Responsibilities for some issues can span several agencies.
management and other aspects of the criminal justice
For example, enrollment in Medicaid, which in many states
system, which necessarily includes strategies around recan be triggered by participation in SSI or SSDI programs,
entry. For example, the Maine legislature created the
contemplates issues not just under the jurisdiction of the
Commission to Improve the Supervision, Management, and state Medicaid agency, but also the agency responsible for
Incarceration of Prisoners, which is charged with making
enrolling disabled people in these other public assistance
recommendations to reduce prison and jail populations, to
programs.
reduce corrections costs and recidivism, and to improve
public safety. [3] Similar directives setting up committees to

2. When conducted effectively, community audits generate

an inventory of organizations large and small, including
those that serve isolated, ethnic, or low-income
communities. Clearinghouses established for particular
systems, the yellow pages, the news media, and staff can be
valuable sources for such an audit. For more information on
how to conduct a community audit in one relevant system,
see Workforce Learning Strategies, Conducting a
Community Audit: Assessing the Workforce Development
Needs And Resources of Your Community (U.S.
Department of Labor, Employment and Training
Administration, 2000-08-01).

Employment is a point at which the goals of the criminal

justice, workforce development, family services, health and
human services, and social services systems can converge.
With budget cuts to all these systems, resources must be
focused on the right individuals (i.e., people who would
benefit the most from interventions), using the right
strategies that are delivered at the right time. Improved
outcomes for individuals returning to their communities, for
their families, and for each systems investments can be
realized by better coordinating the correctional supervision,
treatment, supports, and other services being delivered at
that point of convergence to individuals who have been
incarcerated or are on probation or parole.

=====

There is significant overlap between the factors that make

someone more at risk to reoffend and those that impact
employability. Antisocial attitudes, beliefs, peers, and
personality patterns, which research supports are the
strongest predictors of recidivism, clearly affect how
someone might perform in the workplace. Individuals with
these characteristics tend to have more negative attitudes
about working, less stable employment histories, and an
unwillingness to take low-paying jobs. As such, workforce
development agencies and employment service providers
interested in improving outcomes for individuals with
criminal histories should draw from criminal justice best
practices and collaborate with corrections professionals to
develop integrated responses.

The importance of employment in the reentry

process
Introduction:
With mounting research, it is clear there are significant
benefits for our communities in helping men and women
that have been in prison, jail, or on probation or parole find
employment:
Having a job enables individuals to contribute income to
their families, which can generate more personal support,
stronger positive relationships, enhanced self-esteem, and
improved mental health
They are more likely to develop prosocial relationships
when their time is structured with work and they are able to
help care and provide for their families
Linking individuals with criminal histories to jobs and
helping them succeed can reduce the staggering costs to
taxpayers for reincarceration and increases contributions to
the tax base for community services

Section I: What Works to Reduce Recidivism

This section of the white paper discusses three key
principles that research has shown will lead to recidivism
reduction when effectively applied to corrections
interventions, and how they apply to employment services
and program delivery for individuals with criminal
histories.
How to reduce recidivism

If releasees and supervisees are working, their time is being

spent in constructive ways and they are then less likely to
engage in crime and disorder in their neighborhoods
It is important to note that although employment clearly
plays an important role in reentry, research does not support
the proposition that simply placing an individual in a job is
a silver bullet for reducing criminal behaviors. What various
studies do suggest is that to reduce criminal behaviors and
recidivism, corrections professionals and employment
service providers must address individuals antisocial
attitudes and beliefs associated with crime, many of which
also impact an individuals ability to succeed in the
workplace.

Decades of experience and research have led corrections

professionals to develop a set of guiding principles that,
when implemented correctly, can help reduce reoffending
and violations of conditions of probation and parole. These
principlesknown as the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR)
principleshelp policymakers, administrators, and
practitioners determine how to allocate resources, deliver
services, and provide the right people with the right
supports and services in order to have the greatest impact on
recidivism and public safety.
The Risk Principle: Match the intensity of individuals
interventions to their level of risk for criminal activity

The value of integrating the workforce development,

corrections, and reentry systems

Research shows that prioritizing supervision and services

for individuals at moderate or higher risk of committing a
future crime can lead to a significant reduction in recidivism

among this group. Conversely, intensive interventions for

individuals who are at a low risk of recidivism may actually
be harmful and contribute to increasing the persons
likelihood of engaging in criminal behavior. High-intensity
programming or supervision for lower-risk individuals has
been shown to be an ineffective use of resources.
The Need Principle: Target criminogenic needs, which are
factors that contribute to the likelihood of new criminal
activity.
The need principle directs that treatment and case
management should prioritize the core criminogenic
needs that can be positively impacted through services,
supervision, and supports. Research indicates that the
greater the number of criminogenic needs addressed
through interventions, the greater impact the interventions
will have on lowering the likelihood of recidivism. There is
also evidence that the number of treatment hours an
individual receives influences the effectiveness of the
intervention. Higher-risk individuals require more program
hours than lower-risk individuals, and providing too many
treatment hours to lower-risk individuals can have adverse
effects. Structuring higher-risk individuals time in
programming helps minimize exposure to antisocial
influences, whereas it can interrupt the very kinds of
prosocial activities (including work and family time) that
qualify individuals as lower risk.
The core criminogenic needs include:

Substance Abuse: abuse of alcohol and/or other drugs

(tobacco excluded)
The Responsivity Principle: Account for an individuals
abilities and learning styles when designing treatment
interventions.
The responsivity principle highlights the importance of
reducing barriers to learning by addressing learning styles,
reading abilities, and motivation when designing
supervision and service strategies. Research shows that
social learning approaches and cognitive behavioral
therapies are generally effective in meeting a range of these
needs, regardless of the type of crime committed. Prosocial
modeling and skills development, teaching problem-solving
skills, and using more positive reinforcement than negative
have all been shown to be effective and reflect this
approach.
Why the RNR principles matter for employment-oriented
reentry programs

Research has demonstrated that reducing recidivism

requires that scarce corrections programming, treatment,
and supervision resources be prioritized for people at higher
risk for criminal activity (determined by the risk-factors
score on a validated assessment tool). The RNR principles
should be integrated into any programs that serve large
numbers of individuals with criminal histories including
Presence of Antisocial Behavior: early and continuing
employment programs. Application of the risk principle can
involvement in a number and variety of antisocial acts in a help service providers and administrators triage their more
variety of settings
expensive and intensive services and decide how to allocate
other resources. Further, prioritizing by risk allows
Antisocial Personality Pattern: adventurous, pleasurecorrectional supervisors to free up resources that had been
seeking, weak self-control, and restlessly aggressive
devoted to managing and supervising low-risk individuals
who receive unneeded services to refocus those resources
Antisocial Cognition: attitudes, values, beliefs, and
where they will have greater impact. Addressing
rationalizations supportive of crime; displays of anger,
criminogenic risk and responsivity factors is also important
resentment, and defiance; and negative attitudes toward the for improving individuals levels of employability and
law and justice systems
ability to benefit from education and job readiness
programming.
Antisocial Associates: close association with criminals and To this end, the white paper and resource-allocation and
relative isolation from law-abiding individuals; positive and service-matching tool encourage policymakers and program
immediate reinforcement for criminal behavior
administrators to use validated assessments to objectively
determine individuals levels of risk of criminal behavior. It
Family and/or Marital: poor relationship quality with little
is the first step in matching people with criminal histories to
mutual caring or respect; poor nurturance and caring for
employment services while reducing their risk of
children; and few expectations that family members will
reoffending. These assessments can also inform supervision
avoid criminal behavior
policies and non-employment-related service placements
(such as mental health treatment) that may impact the
School and/or Work: poor interpersonal relationships within effectiveness of employment interventions.
school or work setting. Low levels of performance and
satisfaction in school and/or work
Key Takeaways from Section I
1. RNR principles provide evidence-based guidance on who
Leisure and/or Recreation: low levels of involvement and
should be prioritized to receive interventions and help
satisfaction in noncriminal leisure pursuits
determine what needs those interventions should address in

order to reduce reoffending. For employment service

providers serving people with criminal histories, the RNR
principles help determine where resources can have the
greatest impact not only on improving the likelihood that
individuals can connect to the workforce, but also on
increasing public safety by reducing their chances of future
criminal activity.
2. RNR principles promote a cost-effective approach by
ensuring that resources are focused on individuals with
criminal histories who need services most, and are not
misspent on individuals with criminal histories who are
likely to succeed with little or no interventions (or worse,
increase recidivism by interrupting prosocial activities and
exposing low-risk individuals unnecessarily to high-risk
releasees or probationers).

Section II: Improving Outcomes for Hard-to-Employ

Individuals
This section of the white paper outlines common challenges
faced by hard-to-employ individuals, including those with
criminal histories, discusses workforce development
strategies to improve individuals level of job readiness, and
presents five service-delivery principles that can be
applied to workforce development/job readiness
interventions to address criminogenic risk factors.
Challenges faced by hard-to-employ individuals

The term hard to employ can be used to describe

individuals who, owing to their personal issues and external
factors, have a particularly difficult time connecting to the
labor market. Characteristics associated with people who
are hard to employ include, for example, challenges with
3. Validated, objective risk/needs assessments are essential transportation and housing, education and skill deficits, and
for effectively implementing the RNR principles. To the
health or other needs that impair an individuals ability to
extent that information from these assessments can be
attain and retain employment (including responsivity
appropriately shared by corrections with workforce
factors). Table 1 lists some of the common characteristics of
development professionals and other reentry or community- hard-to-employ individuals.
based service providers, the results can enhance service
matching (including for responsivity issues) and reduce the Individuals with criminal records are often considered a
burden of conducting multiple screenings.
subgroup of the hard-to-employ population because having
a criminal record can create significant additional barriers to
4. For individuals with antisocial thinking, behaviors,
employment, including:
personality patterns, and peers, cognitive behavioral
interventions may be needed both to reduce their likelihood statutory limitations on accessing particular professions
of reoffending and to prepare them for the workplace.
employer reluctance to hire individuals with criminal
Responsivity issues such as learning disabilities and mental, records
physical, or substance use disorders may also need to be
logistical issues resulting from the terms of an individuals
addressed before corrections or employment interventions
release or supervision
can be successful.
5. The resource-allocation and service-matching tool begins
with the application of RNR principles to ensure individuals
who have been under corrections control are grouped by
risk of future criminal behavior. In doing so, it makes
certain that both employment services and recidivismreduction interventions (including probation or parole
supervision) are tailored to individual needs.

Promising workforce development strategies

There are many programs that have been used over the past
several decades in the workforce development field to help
hard-to-employ individuals, including those with criminal
histories. This section discusses eight components of
programs that, when combined based on individual need,
have shown promising results for improving individuals
level of job readiness and employment outcomes.
1. Education and Training
Education and training cover a wide range of programs,
including Adult Basic Education (ABE), General
Educational Development (GED) preparation and
certification, and post-secondary coursework, including
vocational training. Education and training are key
components of job-readiness preparation and are critically
important for increasing access to higher-quality
employment opportunities. Whether an individual receives
basic education, post-secondary education, or more
technical training is dependent on his or her distinct set of
needs.
2. Soft/Cognitive-Skill Development
Soft-skill development, including addressing cognitiverelated attitudinal issues, is crucial for promoting
individuals success in the workplace. Typical soft-skill
programming includes instruction on how to be professional
on the job, how to manage conflicts with coworkers or
superiors, and how to manage time to ensure punctuality.
Depending on individuals deficits, they may be taught
these skills prior to job placement, on the job, or both.
3. Transitional-Job Placements

Transitional jobs are a type of subsidized employment

program in which temporary, income-generating
employment is provided to hard-to-employ individuals with
the goal of improving their employability through work
experience, skills development, and supportive services.
What distinguishes transitional jobs from other subsidized
employment is that they are intended to be a temporary,
developmental experience that helps individuals learn and
apply basic work-readiness skills to improve their
competitiveness in the job market.
4. Non-skill-Related Interventions
There are a number of additional challenges that may
prevent an individual from finding and maintaining
employment that cannot be directly addressed by traditional
job preparation strategies. Needs related to an individuals
ability to learn or respond to programming, such as a
serious mental illness, learning disability, or substance
abuse issue, may need to be addressed in order for the
participant to benefit from an employment program. Less
serious problems may be addressed concurrent with other
programming. Logistical challenges, including the need for
stable housing, clothing, identification, transportation, and
child care, may also prevent an individual from obtaining or
holding a job.
5. Non-transitional Subsidized Employment
Programs providing subsidized employment but not
transitional jobs pay some of participants wages for a
trial period, during which the employers and/or program
provides training and support services to better prepare
participants for permanent, unsubsidized employment.
Unlike transitional jobs, subsidized employment placements
typically can convert into permanent jobs for the individual
after the subsidy period ends.

6. Job Development and Coaching

Job development and coaching services are intended to
connect an individual with unsubsidized employment
opportunities. Job developers work with local employers to
identify job openings. In contrast, job coaches help prepare
the individual for a job searchdeveloping a resume,
searching for appropriate jobs, and completing the
application process.
7. Retention and Advancement Services
Retention and career advancement services are typically
provided to individuals after placement in an unsubsidized
job to assist with any issues that have the potential to impact
tenure. Services may include helping hard-to-employ
individuals identify and address problems, or assisting with
reemployment in cases of job loss. Staff may also work to
match clients with higher-paying jobs or education
opportunities to promote advancement
8. Financial Work Incentives
Incentives, typically in the form of supplemental monthly
cash payments, can encourage job retention. This work
incentive model was developed in the 1990s during welfare
reform efforts and has been shown to increase employment
rates. Payments can be provided for retaining employment
or for moving to higher-quality jobs to encourage
advancement (as measured by higher wages, better benefits,
or full-time instead of part-time employment).
Implementing a comprehensive initiative that incorporates
job readiness, placement, and retention components is a
significant challenge for fiscally strapped municipalities,
counties, and states. Opportunities for job placement

continue to be very limited due to labor market conditions

and pressure to reduce public-sector payrolls. As such, it is
critical that employment service providers triage their
resources according to the job-readiness needs of
individuals, as shown in this segment of the resourceallocation and service-matching tool:
Integrating risk-reduction strategies into employment
programs
The way employment programs are implemented (service
delivery) can impact recidivism reduction by providing a
prosocial, structured, positive environment. There are five
basic service-delivery principles that emerge when
examining how employment program components can be
carried out to both reduce recidivism and improve
workforce outcomes. These principles embrace the tenets of
RNR and can help shape employment programs in ways
that position them to assist participants in avoiding criminal
activity, and ultimately enhance their level of employability
as well.
Engagement: Address antisocial thinking and behavior
through high-impact staff and client interactions (e.g.,
mentoring relationships or cognitive-based interventions).
Timing: Provide services shortly before or directly at
release, or at the start of community supervision, to address
individuals immediate problems, and adapt the services to
individuals changing needs over time.
Incentives: Increase motivation for positive change and job
performance with such measures as stipends for maintaining

employment and peer-supported recognition for program

completion.
Coordination: Collaborate with corrections, workforce, and
reentry professionals and other service providers to ensure
that interventions are provided in ways that support
recidivism reduction and employment goals.
Structured Time: Organize individuals time with effective
programming and positive activities to minimize
opportunities for criminal actions and time with antisocial
peers.
It is critical that the intensity of service delivery provided to
individuals is driven by their individual risk-levels and
needs. For example, higher-risk individuals will need more
intensive engagement immediately following release or at
the beginning of supervision. This group may need greater
incentives, coordination, and structure as employment
program services are delivered. Intensity can refer to the
number of services an individual requires, the frequency
with which a particular service is provided, and the
characteristics of the interaction or engagement with the
participant. By modifying the intensity of service delivery,
employment program components can be tailored to better
address individual risk factors. For instance, an individual
may only require one type of job-preparation service, but
can be enrolled in a program that meets daily to increase its
intensity.

particular) can have a significant impact on employability.

As such, workforce development agencies and employment
service providers interested in improving outcomes for
individuals with criminal histories should draw from
criminal justice best practices and collaborate with
corrections professionals that conduct risk/needs
assessments to develop integrated responses.
4. To use resources most effectively, individuals should be
grouped first by level of risk, followed by a second
assessment to determine job-readiness levels.
Distinguishing which people with criminal histories are
more job ready and which are less job ready will help guide
the service-matching activities that provide the right
combination of employment program components.
5. American Job Centers, as well as other workforcedevelopment providers and their partners in the community,
can be positioned to improve both employment and reentry
outcomes for individuals with criminal histories. This
requires the application of service-delivery principles (how
to do it) to the employment program components (what to
do). These service-delivery principles embrace RNR tenets
and require policymakers and practitioners to pay particular
attention to how individuals are engaged, the timing of
engagement, incentives for program participants,
coordination across systems that serve this population, and
how individuals time is structured.

Key Takeaways from Section II

1. People returning to the community from correctional
facilities or who are under probation or parole supervision
represent a subgroup of the hard-to-employ population that
many American Job Centers and workforce development
practitioners already serve on a daily basis. Although
individuals with criminal records share many of the same
challenges as the hard-to-employ population, they have
additional barriers to employment that must be addressed.

Section III: The Resource-Allocation and Service-Matching

Tool
This section outlines the full resource-allocation and
service-matching tool, and discusses ways it can be used for
decision-making at a program administrator or policymaker
level, as well as to guide individual case management
decisions.
The Resource-Allocation and Service-Matching Tool

2. There are workforce program components that can be

used for individuals with criminal histories to improve their
employment outcomes, including education and training,
soft/cognitive-skill development, transitional-job
placements, non-skill-related interventions, subsidized
employment, job development and coaching, job retention
and advancement services, and financial work incentives. In
most circumstances, program components need to be used
in combination to meet individuals complex needs as they
change over time. Research has shown that simply helping a
high-risk/high-need individual with a criminal history who
is not job ready to write a resume and apply for jobs is not
enough.
3. The factors that put an individual at higher risk of
recidivating (criminogenic attitudes and behaviors, in

The resource-allocation and service-matching tool has been

developed to help with the assessment and resourcemanagement process and to guide the development of
integrated service responses across the corrections,
employment, and reentry fields. It is based on two key
dimensions: the risk of reincarceration and job readiness,
which are used for grouping individuals being released from
prison or jail or who are under community supervision.
There are four groupings that result from these two
assessments, and each can be tied to a combination of
corrections and supervision policies, employment program
components, and service-delivery strategies.

Using the Resource-Allocation and Service-Matching Tool

to make systems-level decisions
Every jurisdiction has a distinct web of community-based
service providers that can be used to reduce the likelihood a
person will commit a crime in the future. Risk/needs and
job-readiness assessments can help reveal the numbers of
individuals with criminal histories that require a range of
employment-readiness and placement services. This
information then can be used to help identify gaps in
community-based service provider expertise or inadequate
capacity. Screening and assessment information can help
policymakers and administrators better understand the size
of the population of individuals who may avoid a costly
reincarceration if given proper services and supports. In
particular, the assessment results can help administrators
determine what types of coordinated reentry/employment
services should be made available for individuals returning
from incarceration or who are under supervision. After
assessments have been conducted, it should be clear what
proportion of the targeted population falls into each of the
four risk/readiness groupings, and how to shift resources to
account for this distribution of needs.

The tool is also meant to help practitioners and program

administrators meet demands for accountability by
providing data-driven criteria to guide decision making. For
example, if there are only 100 slots for a particular
employment program, and the risk/needs assessment ranks
150 potential program participants as at high criminogenic
risk with high need for services, it may be necessary to
examine that group more closely to further distinguish those
whose receipt of interventions would make the biggest
impact on recidivism and employment outcomes.
Additionally, if a lower-risk group is taking up some of the
slots for services that affect employability, then it is worth
considering whether some of those spaces could be freed up
to serve individuals that will benefit more from the service.
While these decisions can be difficult, the sorting tool can
help guide these choices on how to make the most efficient
use of public resources so that neighborhoods and families
reap the greatest benefits.
Using the Resource-Allocation and Service-Matching
Tool for individual case management decisions
By applying the principles associated with risk reduction to
employment program components, service packages can be

tailored to address individuals distinct criminogenic and

job-readiness needs.

Using assessment data and cut-off scores to define the size

of the four groupings and then determining the available
service/supervision slots, system administrators can better
Groups 3 and 4: The Higher-Risk Groups: Groups 3 and 4
decide whether resources should be developed or
both consist of individuals that are at higher risk of future
reallocated (such as when analyses reveal that lowercriminal activity, but have notably different levels of job
risk/more job-ready individuals are taking up spaces in
readiness. Therefore, Group 4 (less job ready) will require
programs that they do not need to succeed).
more employment services than Group 3 to increase their
Although workforce development agencies already invest in
employability; however, both groups will require intensive employment interventions for people with criminal histories
risk-reduction services to reduce their likelihood of
that come through their doors, they are often not oriented to
reoffending. The more intense application of serviceidentify higher-risk individuals and provide them with the
delivery principles (including corrections supervision
type of intensive, specialized programming required to keep
coordination) will look very similar for both of these groups them out of prison and jail and connected to the workforce.
because of their higher-risk levels. In contrast, employment The tool is meant to help jurisdictions narrow the
program components will be individually tailored to address population to be targeted for intensive services and leverage
different job-readiness levels.
their collective resources through multisystem
Groups 1 and 2: The Lower-Risk Groups: Groups 1 and 2
collaboration, cross-training, and planning to reduce
are composed of individuals who are at a lower risk of
individuals criminogenic risk factors that affect
recidivating, but have different levels of job readiness.
employability. By applying certain service-delivery
Given their lower risk level, Groups 1 and 2 have less of a
principles to traditional employment interventions, service
need for, and are less likely to benefit from, placements in
providers can make better use of existing employment
programs that are specifically designed to reduce risk
resources in the community to reduce recidivism.
factors related to criminal activity. Groups 3 and 4 should
The examples provided in the white paper primarily
receive priority placements into these interventions instead. combine existing system responses for each of the four
Because Groups 1 and 2 are both low risk, the servicegroupings, but it is hoped that through coordinated
delivery principles associated with recidivism reduction will multidisciplinary planning, new integrated responses will be
look very similar, but the program components that address envisioned by corrections, reentry, and employment
job readiness will differ. Generally, Group 2 individuals
professionals that make the most efficient and effective use
should receive priority placements into job-readiness
of their collective resources.
services. Group 1 is more likely to be successful with lessintensive programs and will benefit most from placements
Key Terms and Definitions Used in the White Paper
into job-retention services or self-directed programs.
Criminogenic Risk (Risk): The likelihood that an
For examples of how this might apply to specific cases, see individual will engage in new criminal activity. In this
pages 46-55 of the white paper.
context, risk does not refer to the seriousnessof a crime that
a person may commit in the future. Instead, standard
Key Takeaways from Section III
assessments generally provide information simply on the
The resource-allocation and service-matching tool can help likelihood that a person will reoffend.
employment, reentry, and corrections professionals improve
outcomes for their shared population. Policymakers and
Criminogenic Needs (Needs): The characteristics (such as
administrators can use the tool to better determine whether antisocial attitudes, beliefs, and thinking patterns) or
their resources are being used to their best effect and
circumstances (such as a persons friends or family
practitioners can help ensure that the right people get the
dynamics) that research has shown are associated with
right interventions at the right time, and in ways that reduce criminal behavior, but which a person can change.
their chances for reincarceration.
There are four groupings that result from criminogenic
Hard to Employ: A term commonly used to describe
risk/needs and job-readiness assessments of unemployed
individuals with chronic unemployment. It is often
individuals released from prison or jail or starting probation associated with such attributes as low levels of education
or parole. These groupings can be tied to a combination of
(personal factors) or having a criminal record (external
corrections and supervision policies, employment program factors). In cases in which external factors determine that
components, and service-delivery strategies aimed at
individuals are hard to employ, it is important to note that
reducing recidivism. Line-level staff can then individualize this classification does not indicate whether they are job
plans to meet the diverse needs of individuals within each
ready.
grouping.
Job Readiness: A determination based on personal
characteristics that make an individual more or less

competitive in the labor market. These characteristics

generally include personal and family challenges, education
and hard skill deficits, soft skill deficits or related attitudinal
issues, and other needs that may impair individuals ability
to attain and retain employment (including what the RNR
model considers responsivity factors). It is common for
less job-ready individuals to have multiple, complex needs;
although it is also possible for a single severe problem to
prevent readiness. Services to address these obstacles to job
placement are referred to as job-readiness or job preparation
services throughout the white paper.
Job-Readiness Assessments: Typically a structured series
of questions to help collect consistent, useful information
from potential program participants. Most job-readiness
assessments commonly ask questions about a persons
history of employment; education and certification
accomplishments; and attitude toward work, general
motivation, and resilience when disappointment occurs.
Recidivism: The repetition of criminal or delinquent
behavior, most often measured as a new arrest, conviction,
or return to prison and/or jail for the commission of a new
crime or for the violation of conditions of supervision.
Risk/Needs Assessment: A comprehensive examination and
evaluation of both dynamic (changeable) and static
(historical and/or demographic) criminogenic factors that
predict risk of recidivism. Results can be used to guide
decisions about services, placements, supervision, and
sentencing in some cases.
i. Joe Graffam, Alison Shinkfield, Barbara Lavelle, and
Wenda McPherson, Variables Affecting
Successful Reintegration as Perceived by Offenders and
Professionals, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 40, no.
1/2 (2004): 147171
ii. Edward J. Latessa, Why the Risk and Needs Principles
Are Relevant to Correctional Programs (Even to
Employment Programs), American Society of Criminology
10, no. 4 (2011): 973977
iii. Bonta and Andrews, Risk-Need-Responsivity Model for
Offender Assessment and Rehabilitation.
iv. Don A. Andrews, Ivan Zinger, Robert D. Hoge, James
Bonta, Paul Gendreau, and Francis T. Cullen, Does
Correctional Treatment Work? A Psychologically Informed
Meta-Analysis. Criminology 28, no. 3 (1990): 369404.
v. Craig Dowden and Don A. Andrews, The Importance of
Staff Practices in Delivering Effective
Correctional Treatment: A Meta-Analysis of Core
Correctional Practices, International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology 48, no. 2 (2004):
203214

vi. Christopher T. Lowenkamp and Edward J. Latessa,

Increasing the Effectiveness of Correctional
Programming Through the Risk Principle: Identifying
Offenders for Residential Placement,
Criminology and Public Policy 4, no. 2 (2005): 263290;
Clement, Schwarzfeld, and Thompson, The National
Summit on Justice Reinvestment and Public Safety:
Addressing Recidivism, Crime, and Corrections Spending