DOI: 10.3886/icpsr30281.v1
title: Problem Solving Approaches to Issues of Inmate Reentry in Indianapolis, Indiana, 2000-2003
title: Version 1

description: This study involved an evaluation of the reentry component of the Indianapolis Violence Reduction Partnership (IVRP). The IVRP included a problem solving approach to the issue of inmate reentry. On the basis of a problem analysis, the IVRP officials decided to implement a pilot project that involved having recently released inmates attend a neighborhood-based group meeting convened by criminal justice officials and including community representatives and service providers. The meetings were based on the notion of combining deterrence and social support (linkage to services). The pilot project was evaluated using a quasi-experimental design. The treatment group consisted of 82 former inmates who attended one of five meetings. The comparison group consisted of 103 former inmates released at the same time period as the treatment group but in a different neighborhood. Reentry lever-pulling meeting participants and comparison group members were tracked for a period of up to 24 months to determine whether they had been re-arrested during the study period.
description: The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of reentry programming on the risk of failure through the evaluation of the reentry component of the Indianapolis Violence Reduction Partnership (IVRP).
description: The Indianapolis Violence Reduction Partnership (IVRP) included a problem solving approach to the issue of inmate reentry. On the basis of a problem analysis, the IVRP officials implemented a pilot project that involved having recently released inmates attend a neighborhood-based group meeting convened by criminal justice officials and including community representatives and service providers. The lever-pulling meetings were based on the notion of combining deterrence and social support (linkage to services). First meeting officials delivered the message that violence in the community would not be tolerated, and then they described the social services available to the former inmates to help their transition. The pilot project employed a quasi-experimental design. The treatment group consisted of 82 former inmates who attended one of five meetings. The comparison group consisted of 103 former inmates released at the same time period as the treatment group but in a different neighborhood. The meetings were rotated geographically throughout the city so both treatment and comparison groups were drawn from the three targeted areas of the city. The principal outcome measure was re-arrest. Reentry lever-pulling meeting participants and comparison group members were tracked for a period of up to 24 months to determine whether they had been re-arrested during the study period. Data on prison releases were obtained from the Indiana Department of Corrections and re-arrest data were obtained from the Marion County JUSTIS System criminal records system. Arrest data were only obtained on arrests within Marion County and did not include arrest information that may have occurred outside of the county.
description: The study contains a total of 62 variables including demographics, group assignment (control or treatment group), information about the lever-pulling meeting, and criminal records. Data on participant's criminal record included release date, whether individual was re-arrested, number of prior misdemeanor arrests, number of prior felony arrests, number of total prior convictions, number of times on probation and parole, number of times in Department of Corrections, arrest date following release from DOC, number of days to recidivism, length of stay in DOC, type of criminal charge, and intake date. Regarding demographics, the dataset has questions on the participant's age and race.
description: None.
description: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Standardized missing values.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes..
description: Presence of Common Scales: None.
description: Response Rates: Not applicable.
description: Datasets: 
 
 DS1: Dataset
description: record abstracts 
The baseline sample data and the data from interviews and focus groups with ex-offenders and service providers referenced in the project's report (McGarrell, Hipple, and Banks, 2004; NCJ 203922) are not available as part of this data collection.
description: All prison inmates released to Marion County (Indianapolis), Indiana, between June 2000 and October 2001. Smallest Geographic Unit: District
description: The pilot project sample was originally comprised of 200 offenders, however 15 offenders were dropped from the final dataset due to missing data. The 185 individuals in the final sample had valid follow-up end points and re-arrest data and were released from prison to Marion County (Indianapolis), Indiana, between June 2000 and October 2001. The treatment group consisted of 82 former inmates who attended one of five meetings. The comparison group consisted of 103 former inmates released at the same time period as the treatment group but in a different neighborhood.