The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).

The text below is a portion of the complete document.

This essay appeared as an Editorial Introduction to an article in Criminology and Public Policy (Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2006) that presented the findings of a rigorous evaluation of an evidence-based reentry program, Project Greenlight in New York State. The article and two reaction essays are available through the publisher, Blackwell Publishing, http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/.

In recent years, policymakers and practitioners have become aware of the importance of research in determining 'what works' in correctional programming. They have begun to use information regarding 'evidence-based' practices to make decisions about the programs that they should implement. Thus, the likelihood that research may actually be the basis for criminal justice practice has never been greater. This attention to developing correctional programs based on sound principles and rigorous evaluation is long overdue. It has been more than 30 years since Martinson's famous article (Martinson, 1974) and 27 years since the National Academy of Sciences' (NAS) Panel on Research on Rehabilitative Techniques called for "research on criminal rehabilitation [with] rigorous [attention to] experimental design, theoretical rationale, and monitoring of integrity and strength of treatment" (Sechrest et al., 1979:10). Over a decade ago, the discussion focused on identifying the principles of effective correctional treatment programs that are critical to successful outcomes (Andrews, 1995; Andrews et al., 1990; see also Petersilia, 2004). More recently, the criminal justice field has been captivated by the call for "evidence-based programs" that federal policy makers are increasingly attentive to (Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, 2006).

Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:

Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required.

Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org.

If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.