The employment and reentry for formerly incarcerated persons topic area examines a broad range of employment and training programs funded by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration and other organizations that encourage basic skills development, educational attainment, employment, employment retention, and career advancement for individuals returning from incarceration. CLEAR assessed the strength of causal evidence provided in each study and summarized each study’s design, methods, findings, and the intervention examined.
Reentry
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 2000 – 2017.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 21 - 30 of 41
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study examined the effect of the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) program on employment and earnings outcomes for justice-involved veterans with a prior felony conviction and a mental…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The authors examine the impact of participation in Minnesota’s Affordable Homes Program (AHP) on post-release employment, earnings, and recidivism outcomes for people who were previously…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The authors examine the impact of completing Minnesota’s Affordable Homes Program (AHP) on post-release employment, earnings, and recidivism outcomes for people who were previously incarcerated. The…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine how preventing employers from asking about an applicant’s criminal record in the early stage of the hiring process (ban-the-box) affected employment outcomes for…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Milwaukee Safe Street Prisoner Release Initiative on employment, earnings, public benefit receipt, and recidivism. Drawing on administrative…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Second Chance Act (SCA) Adult Demonstration Program on employment, earnings, and recidivism. The study was a randomized controlled trial…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the relationship between the Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities/Mental Illness Substance Abuse (TASC/MISA) program and a range of outcomes, including…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) intervention on employment and recidivism outcomes relative to a job club program called Work Choice.…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a violent prisoner reentry program, the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI), on several outcomes of female prisoners reentering…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Substance Use Treatment and Reentry (STAR) program on post-release employment and recidivism outcomes for justice-involved young adults in…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.