1

 

6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Final Project Milestone 4-Policy Alternative

Erika Tallent

SOCW 6361

Walden University

 

 

 

 

 

 

Social Problem

One of the biggest social problems in the United States is social reintegration. More than 500,000 individuals are freed from prison every year, with three-quarters of those released being apprehended again within five years of their release. Lack of enough preparation, guidance, and resources after being released forces them back to crime. A felony conviction on one’s criminal record usually hinders employment opportunities, public housing aid, and access to social programs. Re-entry into the employment world is a major problem for ex-offenders since public members view them as potential threats to their business (Zhang & Qiu, 2018). Having a small criminal record puts you at a significant disadvantage in the job market and has far-reaching effects. Re-incarceration and unsuccessful re-entry have a devastating impact on communities, families, and individuals. The most susceptible demographics to this social issue are ex-offenders and those who have just been released from jail.

What is the policy alternative?

For years, the PUBLIC LAW 110–199—APRIL 9, 2008 has sought to reduce criminal recidivism by rehabilitating convicts and reuniting them with their families after their release. Because it is designed to positively impact the life outcomes of those who return to society after being incarcerated, the policy has been somehow effective in solving the problem of social reintegration. Since not all policy changes can be accepted, policymakers must have a backup plan if the initial policy fails. In this case, the suggested policy alternative is the Corrections and Recidivism Reduction Act of 2016 (CRRA). Through this policy, the DOJ is required to: (a) come up with programs for recidivism reduction; (b) create a prisoner needs and risk evaluation system; and (c) carry out research on recidivism reduction programs and needs assessment tools (Butts & Schiraldi, 2018). This Act also mandates that community correctional organizations enhance policies and procedures for crime victims, educate personnel on evidence-based approaches, and set aside a part of the funding for the program evaluation study.

What changes (s) in the policy alternative are necessary, and where will they need to occur (local or state)?

Since CRRA is federally mandated and funded, changes must begin at the national level and work their way down to the state level. The federal government should consider how stronger reintegration programs and incentives for ex-offenders in the community will benefit individuals and the whole community.

Is this policy alternative congruent with social work values? Explain.

The suggested policy alternative is in line with the ideals of social work. As social workers, our main goal is to improve human well-being and help those in need. The CRRA is connected with social work values since it focuses on supporting ex-offenders in reintegrating seamlessly back into society. Men and women who have been released from correctional institutions sometimes struggle to reintegrate into their communities due to inadequate preparation, guidance, and resources (Stern et al., 2022). Fortunately, ex-offenders can now obtain the help they need to reintegrate back into society. Making financial resources available and accessible to all ex-offenders will help individuals that are currently denied employment opportunities.

What is the feasibility of the alternative policy (political, economic, and administrative)?

The Corrections and Recidivism Reduction Act of 2016 is feasible politically, economically, and administratively because it is based on changing the way money is spent on recidivism and controlling crime. Crime has a huge impact on Americans’ well-being and tax-funded resources. These expenditures are exacerbated by a cycle of criminality leading to more than 50% re-arrest rates for freed American convicts. Prison reforms that are rigorous and evidence-based, such as the CRRA, will help break the crime cycle, decrease future crime, and save imprisonment costs by permitting more effective re-entry into the workforce after release (Hatfield, 2021). We reviewed the evidence on the underlying factors that determine the value of such prison policy. We discovered significant variation in effectiveness across federal and state programs, suggesting that reallocating budgets from low-performing to high-performing programs could reduce spending while also improving results. We also find evidence that this policy can reduce crime and save money in the long term by cutting jail expenses. Cost-effective policies save at least one dollar in crime and jail expenses for every dollar invested.

Does the policy alternative meet the policy goals (e.g., social equality, redistribution of resources, social work values, and ethics)?

This policy alternative meets the policy goals of redistribution of resources, social equality, and social work policies by increasing the efficiency and efficacy of the Federal prison system.

What are the forces that are for the policy? What are the forces that are against the policy?

Not all decisions we make please everyone; there will always be those who disagree and others who will gather behind us to support us. I would say the forces for this policy are those individuals being released from prison and other humanitarian organizations. Given that this policy promotes ex-prisoners easy reintegration back into society, I don’t believe there is any force that opposes it.

How can policy advocacy skills be used to support the policy alternative?

One of the best policy advocacy skills that can be used to support this policy alternative is building expertise. Developing competence in policy advocacy is critical to a problem’s effective resolution. The best approach to acquiring these skills is to educate oneself on the many facets of certain problems and the most appropriate style of advocacy necessary. To provide light on the different methods in which related issues have been resolved in the past, a thorough study regarding any similar or related problems that have happened in the past must be conducted (Guillemet, 2019). Developing the right attitude is another crucial advocacy skill that can be utilized to promote this policy alternative. Having the appropriate attitude is a key policy advocacy skill that greatly influences one’s efficiency and success.

How does the policy alternative affect clinical social work practice with clients?

The present policy impacts social workers’ clinical practice with clients because state and municipal governments set the tone for how much money will be distributed, which translates into giving help to families on a local, statewide, and even worldwide level.

What changes could be made in the policy to support the needs of clients seeking clinical services?

Based on the NASW Code of Ethics, we have an obligation to our clients, and our main job is to support their well-being. In general, our work prioritizes the needs of our customers, and we must fight for their rights. Social work ideals, such as justice for the economically and socially underprivileged, are expressed in numerous ways. Advocacy is emphasized as a key principle in social work school. This obligation is emphasized in the Code of Ethics. Even if there are substantial reservations about advocacy’s efficiency, social workers will find it difficult to withdraw from it since it is embedded in the professional culture. The changes that can be made to the policy to support clients seeking clinical support are to be more open-minded around the issue and acknowledge the need for more transparency in the implementation process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Butts, J. A., & Schiraldi, V. N. (2018). Recidivism Reconsidered: Preserving the community justice mission of community corrections.

Guillemet, K. B. (2019). Rehabilitation and Restoration: Effective Correctional Approaches for Recidivism Reduction and Their Application in Los Angeles County. UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review, 3(1).

Hatfield, M. A. (2021). The Potential of Community Corrections to Reduce Mass Incarceration in the USA. In Global Perspectives on Reforming the Criminal Justice System (pp. 145- 161). IGI Global.

Stern, J. E., McBride, M. K., Carroll, M., Baker, A., & Savoia, E. (2022). Practices and Needs in Reintegration Programs for Violent Extremist Offenders in the United States: The Probation Officer Perspective.

Zhang, S. X., & Qiu, G. (2018). Psychosocial interventions for substance-abusing criminal offenders: borrowing US experience for the Chinese context. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 24(2), 155-169.