Is Ohio's Prison Reform Plan Reducing the Recidivism Rates - Research Proposal Example

Research Proposal on Ohios Prison Reform Plan to Reduce the Recidivism Rates The increase in recidivism rates in prisons have been a point of concern in Ohio. The offenders age range from 17-41 years. Most of the recidivists commit crimes such as drug abuse, rape, murder, and theft. The earlier researches conducted indicate that most of the offenders are males with a small percentage of females. Approximately the same proportion of males is involved in recidivism acts. Most of them serve hard sentences in jail. As a result, cases of repeated crimes are common that attribute to repeated arrests. This has caused overcrowding in the cells; thus, alerting the prison stakeholders to pay special attention. Reform plans from the prison officials, such as correctional educational programs, drug rehabilitation programs, policies, and support programs have reduced the rates of recidivism. Most of the prisons are offering tailoring, pottery, and furniture courses to the inmates. The studies to be conducted show a remarkable decrease in the rates of recidivism in Ohio prisons. INTRODUCTION Recidivism is a situation where an offender is imprisoned more than once because of repeating certain criminal acts. Deosaran and Ramdhanie (2003) indicate that there has been a tremendous increase in the number of recidivists over time in Ohio prisons. This condition was associated with the problems experienced by inmates while in prisons. James (2015) comments that some offenders though released from prisons still get back to the same jails after committing the same crimes or related ones. LITERATURE REVIEW According to Deosaran and Ramdhanie (2003), 56% of the inmates are recidivists while 39% are first timers in prison. National prisons have a large number of younger inmates who are between 17-41 years. Recidivists are approximately 78% of the same age. Eighty five percent of the inmates in prison are of these ages. Glaze and Kaeble (2013) postulate that 98% of the inmates are men, while approximately 2% are females; among the males, the recidivists are 56% while 39% are first timers in prison. The females comprise of 71% first timers with 24% recidivists. Crimes Committed Glauze and Kaeble (2013) argue that the larger proportion in prisons committed drug related crimes, such as Narcotics, while 27% were guilty of breaking people’s houses, lacency, and other breaking crimes. Eight % of the inmates committed robbery and related crimes. Approximately 10% of the inmates committed crimes such as murder/man slaughter, assault, and rape. 3 percent possessed arms and ammunitions while 1% committed white-collar crimes. The remaining percentage committed other crimes and offences. Sentences Report from the criminal justice system indicate that most of the inmates are serving five years sentences (65%), while 20% are serving 5-10 years sentences in jail. 6 percentage is serving 10-20 years, with 3% serving 20 years and more including life sentences. Recidivists occupy the same proportion since 70% of them are serving five years and below (Glauze & kaeble, 2010). Hard labor sentences are served by a majority of the inmates almost 94% among them serving pure hard labor with 12% hard labor with a fine, and 3% hard labor and strokes of the cane. Most of the inmates are African (61%), while 26% are East African’s, and the rest come from mixed Backgrounds. With this distribution, recidivists occupy the same proportion. Religion The highest proportion are Catholics while the Baptists are 14%, the Muslims are 12% and the Anglicans, seventh day Adventist, Pentecostals, Presbyterians and Jehovah witness occupy the remaining percentage (Glauze & Kaeble, 2010). Christians are 2% and non-conformists are 1%. The recidivists followed the same distribution. Contributing Factors Some of the contributing factors to crime are poverty since approximately 97% of them are lower class individuals. Only 2% are in the middle class. Most of these inmates are able to compute simple arithmetic, read, and write. Reform plan Ohio prison reform plan to categorize inmates as first timers, special or ordinaries is of great benefit. This is because data stored in databases show their correct names, crimes committed, number of times imprisoned, and their addresses (Glauze & Klaebe, 2010). The obtained information is retrieved and used to analyze data. This will save on costs of collecting data across prisons. The above plan is effective when placed in prison headquarters and having terminals placed at various police stations. Policies National policies and coordination unit that is responsible for monitoring the implementation of these policies helps in reducing recidivism. Regular benchmarking with the addition of more prison officers will effect supervision of inmates and reduce repeating same crimes. Programs Training of the prison officers equips them with skills to participate actively in rehabilitation programs. Psychological assessment of the inmates measures the extent of responding to rehabilitation programs. This assists in developing special rehabilitation programs to the mentally handicapped. The response depends on their positivity. Incorporation of different stakeholders, such as NGOs, the government, and other religious bodies offers necessary support to the incarcerated offenders. These programs are effective in Ohio since they reduce recidivism rates (Zajac & Bukren, 2002). Community based correctional facilities programs offer education, employment, and help in controlling abuse of illegal drugs. This program receives offenders under probation. In addition, these programs offer anger management training programs, mental health, and financial counseling. They also offer cognitive based groups and treatment programs for sex offenders. Zajac and Bruken (2002) comment that this program is effective since only 21% of the offenders were unsuccessfully terminated. However, the high-risk offenders, majorly blacks were unsuccessfully terminated at a higher rate than the white offenders. CBCF programs are, therefore, effective in reducing recidivism for moderate offenders and high-risk offenders. They offer programs in substance abuse and training on employment. Others offer education and financial management training, sex offender’s therapies, cognitive-based groups and anger management sessions. Zajac and Bruken (2002) argue that this program is a successful way of reducing recidivism since approximately 64% of the offenders are discharged from these programs. Those who attended CBCF’S programs especially the high risk and the low risk offenders were not re-arrested or reincarcerated. The moderate and high-risk offenders benefited the most from these programs. Developing the Prison Industry and the Physical Conditions This includes lighting, medical services, overcrowding, ventilation, toilets and bathing facilities, mattresses, and beds. Availing these conditions to both the officers and the offenders will create a comfortable condition for change and rehabilitation in the cells (Wysochansiki, 2014). These areas include the pottery, woodwork, tailoring, baking, and electronics. This acts as a good source of income for the released prisoners. Occupied offenders are easier to rehabilitate. Through these projects, the governments also earn revenue from the sale of furniture and clothes. The skills gained from the prisons assist the offenders in life after prisons. They act as a way of earning income. Well-funded pre-release programs are offered to prisoners who are completing their terms to prepare them as they enter in the society. This may include availing them with employment opportunities, referrals, and incorporating them into NGO’s for assistance. Wysochansiki (2014) indicates that issuing certificates to the inmates, who have earned certain skills, will help the community to trust them and reduce recidivism in the community. It will also be easy for the inmates to earn jobs. He argues that legislation laws will allow inmates to earn a reduction credit once they complete programs that may help them fit in the society. He records that some inmates learn Braille and are given certificates. They produce books for students who are visually impaired. They are also given certificates. Correction Education Programs Smith and steurer (2000) conducted a research on incarcerated offenders. The researcher indicates that correctional educational programs showed positive effects on recidivism. Brian (2015) postulates that funding of these programs will assist in reducing recidivism rates. This study was conducted to show how post-release employment and recidivism correlated. Most of the offenders were single, over 30 years, unemployed, had a history of incarceration, had been arrested for more than five times, and were illiterate. This study recorded a drop from 31% to 21% drop in recidivism. Recidivism Data by State N Participants Non-Participants Maryland Re-arrest 840 54% 57% Re-conviction 840 32% 37% Re-incarceration 840 31% 37% Minnesota Re-arrest 1025 42% 54% Re-conviction 1025 24% 34% Re-incarceration 1025 14% 21% Ohio Re-arrest 1234 50% 58% Re-conviction 1234 26% 33% Re-incarceration 1234 24% 31% Smith, L.G., & Steurer, J, S. (2000).Three-state recidivism study executive summary. Education reduces crime. Pp.1-28.link http://www.ceanational.org/PDFs/EdReducesCrime.pdf Latessa and Lowenkamp (2003) argue that correctional programs should be left for offenders who have committed high-risk crimes and those who have high chances of recidivating. High risk offenders are defined as those who do not finish schools and are not employed, while low risk offenders are people who finish school but do not maintain jobs. In Ohio specifically, 50% of the total participants were re-arrested, 26% had been re-convicted, and 24% had been re-incarcerated. There were lower rates of re-arrest, re-conviction, and re-incarceration from inmates who attended correctional education (Glaze & Kaeble, 2013). All offenders who attended correctional education recorded improvement regardless of the type of crime they had originally committed. Employment rates among the offenders who participated in correctional education were higher than those who did not participate. Restorative justice is a system that is used to hold the offenders responsible for their actions. It views the offenders as people who have violated the laws of the land. The victims are allowed to openly discuss with the offenders as they disclose to them the effects of their crimes (Rosa sky, 2009). Through personalizing the offence, the offender realizes his evil actions. This process assists in reducing recidivism acts (Couch, 2015). Drug rehabilitation has proved as an effective measure in reducing recidivism rates. This is because there is a connection between abuse of drugs and crimes committed. Couch (2015) argues that drug treatment programs offered to drug users in prison, reduce the rates of recidivism among the released offenders. Improving family relations after release has demonstrated tremendous improvement. This includes parenting programs, counseling tips after incarceration among others that helps reduce recidivism (Welsh-huggins, 2014). In addition, the inmates who enroll for education courses after incarceration show a reduction in recidivism levels. METHODOLOGY A random sample of 500 inmates in Ohio prisons will be conducted. Open-ended questionnaires will be issued to the prisoners to fill their particulars. The questionnaires will include personal attributes such as their ages, sex, offences committed, length and type of the sentences given, their ethnicity, residence, religion, marital status, social class and education levels (Flerichs, 2008). Computer databases will be used to extract secondary data to compare with the provided data from the questionnaires. Frequency distribution will be used to analyze the quantitative data obtained using excel work sheets. Histograms will be used to represent the distribution of the inmates. Through the histograms, it will be easier to determine whether recidivism rates are reducing in Ohio prisons. SUMMARY OF WHAT TO EXPECT TO FIND Recidivism rates will be established. The proportion of male offenders will be expected to be the highest. The proportion of the recidivists will be the highest among the males. Women offenders will occupy a smaller proportion with female recidivists also being a minute number. The largest proportion of the recidivists will be between 20-40 years who had committed drug related crimes. The recidivists will be from poor backgrounds and mostly from catholic religion. Most of the inmates, who attend correctional educational programs and have learnt various skills from prisons, will be expected to record lower rates of recividivism. References Brian, M. (2014). Prison population projections. Memorandum, 1-5. Coacher. (2015). These programs are helping fix a broken U.S. prison system. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/12/recidivism-programs- prison_n_6655392.html?ir=India Flerichs, R.R. (2008). Simple random sampling. Rapid Surveys, 1-44. Glaze, L., & Kaeble, D. (2013). Correctional populations in the United States. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1-14. James, N. (2015).Offender reentry: Correctional statistics, reintegration into the community and recidivism. Congressional Research Service Report. Latessa, E.J., & Lowenkamp, C. (2003).What works in reducing recidivism. University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 3(3), 1-15. Rosansky, J. (2009). Reducing recidivism: Stopping the trend of criminal relapse in America. Sabiduria, 2(1), 1-10. Smith, L.G., & Steurer, J, S. (2000). Three-state recidivism study executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.ceanational.org/PDFs/EdReducesCrime.pdf Welsh-huggins, A. (2014). State reports record-low Ohio prisoner return rate. Retrieved from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/5/state-reports-record-low-ohio- inmate-return-rate/?page=all Wysochanski, J. (2014). Prison programs aim to reduce recidivism, give inmates job skills. Retrieved from http://www.morningjournal.com/general-news/20140106/prison-programs-aim-to-reduce-recidivism-give-inmates-job-skills Zajac, G., & Bucklen, K. (2002). Special focus on community-based corrections and community reentry. Research and Review, 4(5), 1-12. Read More