RACE AND SENTENCING: MAKING SENSE OF THE INCONSISTENCIES

Numerous sentencing studies have addressed the question: Are racial/ethnic minorities treated more harshly in comparison to similarly situated whites? Several authors have attempted to review this voluminous and diverse body of research using traditional qualitative narrative literature review techniques. It is my contention that these narrative reviews are of limited utility because of shortcomings inherent in qualitative literature reviews. Furthermore, typically these reviews do not focus primarily on explaining why the results of studies addressing this question diverge. To remedy these deficiencies in the literature, I utilize quantitative synthesis methods ("meta-analysis") that quantify the difference in sentencing outcomes between whites and minorities after controlling for legally relevant factors (i.e., criminal history and offense seriousness) in adult, non-capital cases processed in the United States. The meta-analytic procedure employed in this research more accurately determines whether unwarranted racial disparity exists in sentencing outcomes and estimates the magnitude of such disparity. Additionally, using coded information from each study and characteristics of the sentencing jurisdiction obtained from the U.S. Census, I attempt to explain why the findings from this body of research diverge. The results of this meta-analytic synthesis indicate that minorities were sentenced more harshly than whites. Differences in sentencing outcomes between these groups generally were statistically significant but statistically small (although not necessarily substantively small). Larger estimates of unwarranted sentencing disparity were found in analyses that examined drug offenses; larger estimates of unwarranted disparity were also found when researchers assessed sentencing outcomes relating to imprisonment decisions or discretionary decisions. Smaller estimates of unwarranted sentencing disparity were found in analyses that employed more control variables, especially those that controlled for defendant SES, utilized precise measures of key variables, or examined sentencing outcomes relating to length of incarcerative sentence. However, even when consideration was confined to those analyses employing key controls and precise measures of key variables, statistically significant but statistically small differences in sentencing outcomes persisted. These findings call into question the so-called "no discrimination thesis." Furthermore, at the structural level, unwarranted sentencing disparity did not vary in a manner consistent with conflict perspective's threat hypothesis

Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities in Incarcerated Populations

Alarming disparities in population health and wellness in the United States have led to multi-disciplinary research efforts to create health equity. Identifying disparities, elucidating the etiological bases of disparities, and implementing solutions to eliminate disparities are part of the U.S. national health agenda. Racial and ethnic disparities have been identified throughout the cancer control continuum, in cardiovascular disease, diabetes and a multitude of other conditions. The causes of disparities are complex, condition specific, and conjectured to result from combinations of biological and socio-behavioral factors. Racial and ethnic health disparities within the vast incarcerated communities have been excluded from most studies, yet are of significant ethical and fiscal concern to inmates, governing bodies, and non-incarcerated communities into which inmates return. Importantly, research on racial and ethnic disparities in this unique population may shed light on the relative etiologies of health disparities and solutions for creating health equity throughout the general population in the United States

The effectiveness of incarceration-based drug treatment on criminal behavior.

Background - Many, if not most, incarcerated offenders have substance abuse problems. Without effective treatment, these substance-abusing offenders are likely to persist in non-drug offending. The period of incarceration offers an opportunity to intervene in the cycle of drug abuse and crime. Although many types of incarceration-based drug treatment programs are available (e.g., therapeutic communities and group counseling), the effectiveness of these programs is unclear. Objectives - The objective of this research synthesis is to systematically review quasi-experimental and experimental (RCT) evaluations of the effectiveness of incarceration-based drug treatment programs in reducing post-release recidivism and drug relapse. A secondary objective of this synthesis is to examine variation in effectiveness by programmatic, sample, and methodological features. In this update of the original 2006 review (see Mitchell, Wilson, and MacKenzie, 2006), studies made available since the original review were included in an effort to keep current with emerging research. Main results - Seventy-four evaluations met our eligibility criteria. The overall average effect of these programs was approximately a 15 to 17% reduction in recidivism and drug relapse. The effectiveness of such programs, however, varied by program type. Therapeutic communities had relatively consistent but modest reductions in recidivism and drug relapse. Counseling and narcotic maintenance programs had mixed effects. Specifically, counseling programs on average reduced recidivism but not drug relapse, narcotic maintenance programs had sizeable reductions in drug relapse but not recidivism, and boot camps had negligible effects on both recidivism and drug relapse. Conclusions - This synthesis of evaluations of incarceration-based drug treatment programs found that such programs are modestly effective in reducing recidivism. These findings most strongly support the effectiveness of therapeutic communities, as these programs produced relatively consistent reductions in recidivism and drug use. Both counseling and incarceration-based narcotic maintenance programs had mixed effects. Counseling programs were associated with reductions in recidivism but not drug use; whereas, incarceration-based narcotic maintenance programs were associated with reductions in drug use but not recidivism. Note that our findings regarding the effectiveness of incarceration-based narcotic maintenance programs differ from a larger review of community-based narcotic maintenance programs (see Egli, Pina, Christensen, Aebi, and Killias, 2009). Finally, boot camp programs for drug offenders had negligible effects on both recidivism and drug use

Perceived conditions of confinement: A national evaluation of juvenile boot camps and traditional facilities.

In a national study of juvenile correctional facilities, the perceived environment of 22 juvenile boot camps was compared to the perceived environment of 22 traditional facilities. Self-report surveys completed by 4,121 juveniles recorded information on demographics, risk factors, and perceptions of the facility\u27s environment. Compared to juveniles in traditional correctional facilities, boot camp residents consistently perceived the environment as significantly more controlled, active, and structured, and as having less danger from other residents. Boot camp juveniles also perceived the environment as providing more therapeutic and transitional programming. Overall, from the perspective of the juveniles, boot camps appear to provide a more positive environment conducive to effective rehabilitation considering almost all of the conditions measured. A major concern is that in both types of facilities, juveniles perceived themselves to occasionally be in danger from staff (rated as rarely to sometimes). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved

The Environment and Working Conditions in Juvenile Boot Camps and Traditional Facilities

This national study of juvenile correctional facilities compared the correctional environments of 25 juvenile boot camps to those of 22 traditional juvenile facilities. Data on perceived environmental conditions for juveniles and work climate for staff, as well as demographic characteristics, were collected from 1,233 juvenile correctional facility staff. While there was some regional variation, in comparison to staff employed in traditional juvenile correctional facilities, boot camp staff perceived the environmental conditions for juveniles as having significantly more activity, control, justice, structure, caring, and therapeutic programming, and believed that their releases were better prepared for the future. Boot staff also perceived their facilities as having less danger for residents and staff, as well as having less general environmental danger and risks to residents. Furthermore, boot camp staff perceived their work climates as generally more favorable than comparison facility staff. In contrast to the opinions of many boot camp critics, these data suggest that the boot camp environment has more of the environmental components suggested by psychological theorists as being necessary for effective correctional treatment

The influences of personal background on perceptions of juvenile correctional environments

This study examined whether the individual characteristics of race, sex, and education affect juvenile correctional staff\u27s perceptions of their work environments. Prior to 1970, correctional staff were minimally educated and predominantly comprised of White males. Correctional reformers believed that employing more female, minority, and highly educated staff members would lead to more efficacious correctional environments. The existing research conducted in adult correctional facilities not only calls this belief into question, but also indicates that the hiring of nontraditional staff may have exacerbated existing internal hostilities. These research efforts uniformly examined adult correctional institutions, however. This study examined these issues in a large national sample of juvenile correctional staff. Results revealed that individual characteristics of juvenile correctional staff do significantly affect perceptions. Contrary to the prior research in adult facilities, the current study found few, if any, manifestations of either racial or sexual hostility in juvenile correctional facilities

The impact of individual, organizational, and environmental attributes on voluntary turnover among juvenile correctional staff members

In this study we assessed the impact of individual employee characteristics, organizational attributes, and quality of the correctional environment on the turnover intentions of juvenile correctional staff members. Both individual characteristics and organizational attributes were significant predictors of turnover intentions. The individual characteristics were age, race, and education; the organizational variables were job satisfaction, stress, and staff support and communication. In general, the organizational attributes were stronger predictors of turnover. Only one variable pertaining to the quality of correctional environment, facility\u27s amount of care toward juveniles, was significantly related to turnover. In contrast to findings of previous research, dangerousness, gender, and tenure were not related to staff turnover. We discuss the implications of these results for correctional staffing

The Effectiveness of Incarceration-Based Drug Treatment on Criminal Behavior: A Systematic Review

Many, if not most, incarcerated offenders have substance abuse problems. Without effective treatment, these substance-abusing offenders are likely to persist in non-drug offending. The period of incarceration offers an opportunity to intervene in the cycle of drug abuse and crime. Although many types of incarceration-based drug treatment programs are available (e.g., therapeutic communities and group counseling), the effectiveness of these programs is unclear. The objective of this research synthesis is to systematically review quasi-experimental and experimental (RCT) evaluations of the effectiveness of incarceration-based drug treatment programs in reducing post-release recidivism and drug relapse. A secondary objective of this synthesis is to examine variation in effectiveness by programmatic, sample, and methodological features. In this update of the original 2006 review (see Mitchell, Wilson, and MacKenzie, 2006), studies made available since the original review were included in an effort to keep current with emerging research. This synthesis of evaluations of incarceration-based drug treatment programs found that such programs are modestly effective in reducing recidivism. These findings most strongly support the effectiveness of therapeutic communities, as these programs produced relatively consistent reductions in recidivism and drug use. Both counseling and incarceration-based narcotic maintenance programs had mixed effects. Counseling programs were associated with reductions in recidivism but not drug use; whereas, incarceration-based narcotic maintenance programs were associated with reductions in drug use but not recidivism. Note that our findings regarding the effectiveness of incarceration-based narcotic maintenance programs differ from a larger review of community-based narcotic maintenance programs (see Egli, Pina, Christensen, Aebi, and Killias, 2009). Finally, boot camp programs for drug offenders had negligible effects on both recidivism and drug use

Boot Camps and Shock Incarceration Programs

Correctional boot camps, also known as “shock incarceration” programs, are correctional programs modeled after military basic training. Just like basic training, boot camps emphasize drill and ceremony—and physical activity. Generally, boot camps target young, nonviolent offenders with limited criminal history. Boot camps are largely short-term programs lasting 90 to 180 days. Inmates who successfully complete these programs are released under supervision back to the community; however, inmates who drop out or are dismissed from boot camps are often required to serve longer terms of incarceration in traditional correctional facilities. Typically, inmates involved in boot camps are required to wake up before dawn, dress quickly, gather, and march to an exercise yard, where they perform calisthenics, complete long runs, take on obstacle/challenge courses, and engage in manual labor. Inmates march to their dining facilities, where they typically eat quickly and with minimal conversation before engaging in more military exercises. Boot camps require inmates to adhere to a strict code of conduct at all times. Deviations from these rules are met with reprimands or punishments involving physical exercises (e.g., push-ups) or the removal of privileges. Outside of this quasi-military orientation, boot camps vary greatly. Some programs have little to no time allotted for treatment activities, while others devote considerable portions of the day to these activities. Some programs require offenders to volunteer for the programs; others allow judges or corrections officials to mandate boot camp participation. Another important variation is in the manner and intensity of postrelease community supervision; some programs offer offenders limited community supervision, while other programs offer intensive supervision. This bibliography lists research describing boot camps and their philosophy and goals. It also details research that evaluates inmate adjustment to the boot camp environment and the effects of boot camp participation on various outcomes. Taken together, the studies listed here describe the rise, fall, and evolution of correctional boot camp programs.</p