Date of Award

Fall 2025

Project Type

Dissertation

Program or Major

Sociology

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

First Advisor

David Finkelhor

Second Advisor

Joshua Davis

Third Advisor

Thomas Safford

Abstract

As prison populations climb, it is inevitable that the vast majority of incarcerated individuals will eventually return to the community. As they return, they face numerous barriers resulting from their incarceration. While it is important to identify barriers to reentry, it is also important to identify facilitators of reentry, which include forces that may mitigate reentry challenges. A tool is needed to measure this comprehensive list of barriers and facilitators, and in doing so, one may identify improvements and successes that stretch beyond merely that of recidivism. “Successful” reentry is typically measured through low recidivism rates, which recent government reports suggest is an incomplete measure of holistic well-being of those in reentry and insufficient in capturing the successes along the path of desistance from crime. It is also important to understand how barriers and facilitators are unique among women, particularly in a time when a great deal of reentry programming is developed with the knowledge of “what works” for men. Finally, rehabilitative efforts should be considered in the context of community support. Understanding perspectives of rehabilitation is essential for future studies and for navigating dialogue surrounding policy.

First, I conduct a scoping review of women’s reentry programs. Using a systematic search strategy, I screened studies published between 2014 and 2025 from Criminal Justice Abstracts, PsychInfo, and Web of Science, in addition to Google Scholar and Google, that evaluate women’s reentry programs. The structure follows a similar format to Ndrecka (2014). A total of 18 publications met the criteria for inclusion in the review. The primary treatment targets across the programs evaluated range from employment (mentioned as a primary treatment target in 10 studies) to access to services (mentioned in just one study), in addition to many others that can be found in Chapter 1. Results indicate that studies capturing strictly recidivism outcomes comprise just 22.2% of the studies included in this review, while 44.4% capture non-recidivism outcomes and 33.3% capture recidivism outcomes in addition to other non-recidivism outcomes. Other outcomes include mental health/stress, employment/vocation, substance use, relationships/community, and housing. The primary treatment targets indicated align with the outcomes measured in 56% of studies. These findings are discussed in the context of women’s reentry programming and the future of operationalizing success.

Next, I evaluate the Dismas Home of New Hampshire using recommendations from both Chapter 1 and the National Reentry Resource Center. I evaluate barriers and facilitators to reentry by creating a survey asking participants questions about their experiences with physical health, substance use and sobriety, mental health, employment, money management, relationships and community, housing, and continued justice system contact. Participants were asked to respond to questions by ranking their experiences with these barriers/facilitators on a Likert scale. Participants were also asked related open-ended questions which I then coded for themes and considered in the context of General Strain Theory (GST). A total of 15 current and former residents responded to the survey. Results indicate that not all justice system contact is negative, and while most results reflected the positive effect of program participation across all eight barriers/facilitators, they should be interpreted with a degree of caution due to small sample size. The survey tool is included in the Appendices, and future research may consider utilizing this tool for capturing more comprehensive measures of success in reentry.

Finally, I analyze the data from the Pew Research Center’s February 2014 Political survey to offer a context for support for rehabilitation. Dependent variables include support for treatment over prosecution for people who use illegal drugs, support for states moving away from mandatory prison sentencing for non-violent drug offenders, and acceptance of a store or business selling marijuana in one’s neighborhood. Political party is the main independent variable and is interacted with education, personal marijuana use, and sex in a series of binary logistic regressions which are supplemented by visual confirmations. Results indicate a clear difference between Democrats with a bachelor’s degree and those without predicted on the probability of support for treatment. The difference in predicted probability of support for treatment is also clear between those who use marijuana and those who do not among Democrats and those who identify as some other party. Relatively similar results can be found when predicting the probability of support for states moving away from mandatory sentencing for non-violent drug offenders. The differences between those who use marijuana and those who do not are clear across all three parties when predicting the probability of acceptance of a store selling marijuana in one’s neighborhood. The difference between males and females on the predicted probability of acceptance of a store selling marijuana is clear only amongst Republicans. Results, both significant and non-significant, are discussed and reflected on through the lens of Moral Foundations Theory (MFT).

Download

Share

COinS