How to Use This Site Did you find what you needed
Better results for kids and families through research-informed policy

Root Causes: Recidivism

  • The prison population is growing. At the end of 2009, state and federal correctional authorities had jurisdiction over a record high 1,613,656 prisoners. [1] Parallel growth can be seen in the number of individuals released from prison, which has increased by 350 percent over the past 20 years. [2] The prison population, and consequently the population of released offenders, includes a disproportionate number of black males, who were imprisoned at a rate 6.5 times higher than white males in 2008. [3] This racial inequity should be considered when crafting criminal justice policy and supports for ex-offenders.
  • Community lack needed resources. Most individuals are released from prison into the community without supervision or reentry services. [4] The majority of prisoners return to a small number of communities plagued by poverty, crime, unemployment, as well as minimal economic opportunity and supports such as housing. [5]
  • Ex-offenders face significant barriers.  Well-known barriers to obtaining education, vocational training, gainful employment, housing, substance abuse treatment and mental health services—confront offenders after their release.  These barriers and others present challenges that contribute to recidivism. [6]Very often, ex-offenders lack education or job skills, including “soft skills” like punctuality and communication, that are essential for gaining and maintaining employment. The Bureau of Justice Statistics found that about 41 percent of inmates in local jails and state and federal prisons had not completed high school or its equivalent.  Additionally, many states limit, sometimes unnecessarily, the ability of ex-offenders to obtain professional licenses or receive work supports.  Mental illness, addiction, and other health problems can also pose substantial barriers to securing and maintaining a job.

[1] Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice. (2009).  Prisoners at year end.
 [2] Harrison, P.M., Beck, A.J., & Reentry Policy Council. (2006), The Report of the Reentry Policy Council; Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2005. Washington, D.C: Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice.
[3] West, H.C., Sabol, W., & Cooper. M. (2009). Prisoners in 2008. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
[4] Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. Studies in crime and public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[5] Lynch, J. P., Sabol, W. J., & Urban Institute, (2001). Prisoner reentry in perspective. Washington, D.C: Urban Institute ; La Vigne, N., Kachnowski, V., Travis, J., Naser, R., & Visher, C. (2003). A portrait of prisoner reentry in Maryland. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute; La Vigne, N, Mamalian, C., Travis, J., & Visher, C. (2003). A portrait of prisoner reentry in Illinois. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute;  La Vigne, N., Gillian, T., Visher, C., Kachnowski, V., & Travis, J. (2003). A Portrait of Prisoner Reentry in Ohio. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
[6] Andrews, Bonta, & Proulx, Jean. (1996). The psychology of criminal conduct. Canadian Journal of Criminology. Revue Canadienne De Criminologie, 38, 362; Andrews, D.A., Zinger, Ivan, Hoge, R.D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, F., & Cullen, F.T. (1990). Does Correctional treatment work? a clinically-relevant and psychologically-informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28(3), 369-404; Listwan, S. J., Cullen, F. T., & Latessa, E. J. (January 01, 2026). How to Prevent Prisoner Re-Entry Programs From Failing: Insights From Evidence-Based Corrections. Federal Probation, 70, 3, 19; Listwan, Shelley J., Patrick Van Voorhis and P. Neal Ritchy. (Forthcoming). Personality, criminal behavior and risk assessment: Implications for theory and practice. Criminal Justice and Behavior; Lowenkamp, C.T., & Latessa, E J. (May 01, 2025). Increasing the effectiveness of correctional programming through the risk principle: identifying offenders for residential placement. Criminology & Public Policy, 4, 2, 263-290; Van Voorhis, P. (1987). Correctional effectiveness: the high cost of ignoring success. Federal Probation, 51(1):56-62.

A Two-Generational Approach. Successful or failed reintegration affects both ex-offenders’ and their children.  Policies to support employment for reintegrating ex-offenders support the well-being and economic success of both generations.

Effects on Communities and Social Services. The collateral consequences of imprisonment —such as mental illness, serious health problems and vulnerability to victimization—cannot be ignored.  These issues affect not only ex-offenders’ employment but also their communities and other social service systems. [1]

[1] Altschuler, D. M., Stangler, G., Berkley, K., & Burton, L. (2009). Supporting youth in transition to adulthood: lessons learned from child welfare and juvenile justice. Washington, DC: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform; Gendreau, Paul (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.