DISMAS Evaluation 1 Running head: Project Dismas Evaluation DISMAS Evaluation: 2007 2008 Dr. Elizabeth C. McMullan Grambling State University
DISMAS Evaluation 2 Abstract An offender notification project called DISMAS began in December of 2007 to help reduce the amount of violent crimes committed in the Jacksonville area. Data was collected from 64 DISMAS participants and 70 non participants who were matched on types of crimes committed and date of release. Study results indicate that participation in DISMAS was not a statistically significant predictor of whether or not a subject would have contact with law enforcement after release. However when examining the impact of DISMAS on those who had contact with law enforcement after release it was determined that those who attended DISMAS had less criminal contact with law enforcement than those who did not attend.
DISMAS Evaluation 3 Background Over 650,000 people are released from federal and state prisons each year (Anonymous, 2007). Approximately two-thirds of these individuals are re-arrested and one-half are reconvicted within a three year period (Visher, 2007). At the local level over 38,000 individuals were released from one of our local facilities in 2006 and approximately 44% of these individuals were re-arrested before December 31, 2007 (JSO, 2008). Jacksonville remains one of the leaders in the state for violent crime rates (FDOLE, 2009). Project DISMAS was first implemented by Sheriff Rutherford in December of 2007 to help reduce the amount of violent crime committed in the Jacksonville community. Project DISMAS is a notification meeting designed for violent offenders returning to the Jacksonville area following incarceration. At this meeting ex-offenders are educated about the increased penalties they will face if they choose to commit another violent crime and are presented with an alternative choice, positive change. Participants are then introduced to service providers within the community who are willing and able to offer them much needed services as they attempt to lead more productive lives as citizens of Jacksonville. Between December of 2007 and December of 2008 project DISMAS reached an audience of 111 ex-offenders. There were a total of 31 ex-offenders who met the original qualifications for project DISMAS. The Jacksonville Reentry Center maintained a list of all participants during this time period. An additional list of violent offenders who were scheduled to return to the Jacksonville area between December of 2007 and December of 2008 was obtained from the Florida Department of Corrections (hereinafter FDOC). The researcher matched the 31 qualified
DISMAS Evaluation 4 DISMAS participants to 48 non-participants from the FDOC list for comparative purposes. The combined list of names were given to the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office and data was compiled concerning any and all contact these individuals had with law enforcement since their release date. Although criminal histories could be established for many of the DISMAS participants this information was lacking for most of the non-participants and is therefore a limitation of this study. Research Questions Research Question 1: What is the impact of the DISMAS program on whether or not there was contact with law enforcement after release? n = 134 Research Question 2: What is the impact of DISMAS on the number of contacts with law enforcement after release? n = 79 Research Question 3: For those subjects who had contact with law enforcement after release, what is the impact of DISMAS on whether or not the contact was criminal? n = 79 Methodology A binary logistic regression was conducted to determine whether participation in DISMAS (0 = non-participant & 1 = participant) had an impact on contact with law enforcement after release (n= 134). The model examined contact with law enforcement based upon participation status while controlling for race. A logistic regression was then conducted to determine whether participation in DISMAS had a statistically significant impact on the number of contacts with law enforcement. For this analysis the sample consisted only of those who had contact with law enforcement after release (n = 79). The third and fourth research questions were examined using a cross tabulation. A cross tabulation was used to determine whether the expected types of contacts with law enforcement exceeded the observed types of contacts between the control and treatment groups. Type of contact was categorized as either criminal or non-criminal.
DISMAS Evaluation 5 Subjects The sample for the first research question consisted of 134 subjects who had committed a violent crime for which they served a formal sentence and were scheduled to return to the Jacksonville area between December of 2007 and December of 2008. After carefully reviewing prior history of all 111 DISMAS participants it was determined that only 64 subjects met the criteria for DISMAS. A control group was established by randomly selecting 70 subjects from a FDOC list who were matched with DISMAS participants on the types of crimes committed and the scheduled dates of their release. Most of our subjects were male (n = 131 or 97.8%) with only 3 (2.2%) females. Our sample was also predominately non-white (n = 90 or 67.2%) where whites only accounted for 32.8% (n = 44) of the distribution. The second and third research questions required the analysis of only those individuals who had contact with law enforcement after their release from prison. This reduced sample
DISMAS Evaluation 6 consisted of 79 subjects. Of these, 22.8% (n = 18) were white and 77.2% (n = 61) were nonwhite. The distribution for gender remained the same where all three women had some form of contact with law enforcement after release. Most of the remaining subjects belonged to the control group (non-participants). Most subjects who had contact with law enforcement after their release only came into contact with them once. While the least number of contacts with law enforcement for this group was one and the largest number of contacts for this group was sixteen. For the purposes of illustration these contacts were categorized as either: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 or more.
DISMAS Evaluation 7 Overall most contact with law enforcement was criminal (n = 52 or 65.8%). There were 27 (34.2%) non-criminal contacts made with law enforcement after release.
DISMAS Evaluation 8 More non-participants came into contact with law enforcement (n = 48) than DISMAS participants (n = 31) overall. More of the contacts with law enforcement within the DISMAS group were of a non-criminal nature (n = 16 or 51.6%). The opposite is true of the Control group (also known as the non-participants) where most of their contacts with law enforcement were of a criminal nature (n = 37 or 77%).
DISMAS Evaluation 9 Results Research Question 1: Results indicate that participation in DISMAS does not have a statistically significant impact on whether or not a person has contact with law enforcement after release (even when controlling for race). Tables for Research Question 1: Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1.130 a.017.002 2.590 a. Predictors: (Constant), Attend DISMAS?, Race ANOVA b Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 15.153 2 7.577 1.130.326 a Residual 878.556 131 6.707 Total 893.709 133 a. Predictors: (Constant), Attend DISMAS?, Race b. Dependent Variable: Number of contacts with LE since release Coefficients a Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. 1 (Constant) 1.181.896 1.318.190 Race.511.482.093 1.059.291 Attend DISMAS? -.401.454 -.078 -.885.378 a. Dependent Variable: Number of contacts with LE since release
DISMAS Evaluation 10 Research Question 2: This model was statistically significant and explains between 9% and 12.2% of the variance in the dependent variable. The coefficient in the first logit model was negative and means that those who attended DISMAS were less likely to have contact with law enforcement after their release than those who did not attend. Race was also significant where blacks were more likely to have contact with law enforcement after release than whites. Tables for Research Question 2: Model Summary Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R Step -2 Log likelihood Square Square 1 168.740 a.090.122 a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 4 because parameter estimates changed by less than.001. Variables in the Equation B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B) Step 1 Race 1.021.388 6.938 1.008 2.776 DISMAS -.730.370 3.891 1.049.482 Constant -.968.705 1.884 1.170.380
DISMAS Evaluation 11 Research Question 3: For those subjects who had contact with law enforcement after release, what is the impact of DISMAS on whether or not the contact was criminal? There was a statistically significant difference in the number of observed and expected frequencies between the control and treatment groups. DISMAS participants were less likely to have more noncriminal contacts with law enforcement than expected and non-participants were more likely to have criminal contacts with law enforcement after release. Tables for Research Question 3: Group Designation * Criminal or Non-Criminal contact Crosstabulation Criminal or Non-Criminal contact Non-Criminal Contact Criminal Contact Total Group Designation Control Group Treatment Group Total Count 11 37 48 Expected Count 16.4 31.6 48.0 Count 16 15 31 Expected Count 10.6 20.4 31.0 Count 27 52 79 Expected Count 27.0 52.0 79.0 Pearson Chi- Square Chi-Square Test Value df Sig. 6.895 1.009 Conclusions While participation in DISMAS cannot be used as a significant predictor for future contact with law enforcement it does have an impact on the number and types of contacts. Therefore, the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office is encouraged to continue with project DISMAS.
DISMAS Evaluation 12 Limitations There were several limitations to this study that must be taken into consideration for reporting purposes. Using a person's participation in DISMAS while controlling for race only explains a small amount (9-12%) of the variation in contacts with law enforcement. This study also relied solely on various measures for contact with law enforcement to determine the effectiveness of project DISMAS. The rational being those who are leading more productive lives will not have contact with law enforcement, or at least not have criminal contact with law enforcement after their release or participation in DISMAS. It should be noted that not all criminal behavior results in a contact with law enforcement. The final limitation concerns the amount of time between release and evaluation of this program. Most experts agree that recidivism is measured within three years after release. This program has only been in existence since December of 2007 and obviously cannot accommodate the three year time period just yet. Suggestions for Future Research Future studies should include information about criminal history for all subjects. This study was limited in that criminal histories were not available for most of the control group (aside from the offense for which they were serving time). Previous history should specifically examine the types of previous offenses committed as well as any and all sentences previously served and the amount and type of contact with law enforcement each subject had prior to their release (and/or participation in DISMAS). The evaluation period should commence every year for a period of at least three years to truly determine the effectiveness of this program. Future data should include interviews with DISMAS participants as well as non-dismas participants about their impression of this program.
DISMAS Evaluation 13 References Anonymous (2007). House committee report on second chance act. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 20 (2), 141-144. Retrieved July 9, 2008, from ProQuest database. Florida Department of Law Enforcement (2009). UCR Offense Data. Retrieved from http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/content/fsac/data---statistics-(1)/ucr-offense-data/ucr- Offense-Data.aspx Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Report (2008). Visher, C. A. (2007). Returning home: Emerging findings and policy lessons about prisoner reentry. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 20(2), 93-103. Retrieved July 11, 2008, from ProQuest database.