The Housing Landscape for Returning Prisoners in the District

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.

Abstract

This report examines the housing landscape of prisoner reentry in the District of Columbia through an analysis of neighborhoods that had high rates of returning prisoners and a survey of housing-related providers. This report fills important gaps in information vital to the District's continuing efforts to implement effective strategies for reintegrating and supervising returning parolees. More specifically, this research has been developed to provide a framework for understanding what types of housing and housing support services exist in the geographic areas to which persons leaving prison return, and to document the needs of communities from the viewpoint of the service providers. The ultimate goal is to sharpen the community's thinking on the issue of housing and prisoner reintegration, and to foster policy innovations that will improve outcomes for individuals, families, and communities.

The text below is an excerpt from the complete document. Read the full report in PDF format.

Introduction

This report examines prisoner reentry in the District of Columbia within the context of housing and housing-related issues. Reentry is the process of leaving prison and returning to society. With the exception of those few who die while in prison, all prisoners will at some point return to the community. This year, more than 630,000 prisoners will be released from state and federal prisons across the country, more than four times as many as were released in 1980. Communities across the country are grappling with challenges associated with the successful reintegration of former prisoners. New research has documented that disadvantaged urban communities receive the majority of released prisoners, and they are most often concentrated in just a few neighborhoods (La Vigne and Kachnowski 2003; La Vigne et al. 2003; La Vigne and Thomson 2003). Accessibility of housing and other social services, such as substance abuse treatment and employment services, is likely to affect the reentry experience of returning prisoners (Visher and Farrell 2005). This report assesses both the social fabric within communities that have a high percentage of returning prisoners and explores the housing landscape for prisoners within these areas and throughout the city.

More specifically, the purpose of this study is fourfold: (1) to document the geographic concentrations of returning prisoners in the District of Columbia; (2) to develop an assessment of housing and community-based capacity in District neighborhoods where prisoners are returning in large numbers; (3) to explore the nature of housing-related reentry programming; and (4) to draw attention to the larger policy issues of building supportive neighborhood environments for returning prisoners. Specifically, the study addresses the following questions: 

1. What is the current policy context underlying prisoner reentry in the District?
2. What barriers or restrictions do returning prisoners face with regard to accessing housing?
3. Where are prisoners returning within the District of Columbia? Are there concentrations of returning prisoners in particular neighborhoods in the District?
4. Are highly disadvantaged neighborhoods receiving a large number of returning prisoners? What are the specific characteristics (e.g., poverty, crime, education-level, housing prices, housing quality, etc.) of these neighborhoods?
5. What opportunities for housing exist for returning prisoners in the District? Do areas with high concentrations of returning prisoners face particularly challenging issues with regard to housing?

This report relies on data collected from two sources: (1) The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency provided data on the census tract locations of prisoners returning to the District of Columbia in fiscal year 2003. The data were linked to demographic information on age, race, sex, marital status, employment, and educational attainment; (2) A telephone survey was conducted using a small sample of District of Columbia agencies and organizations. The survey collected information on type of organization, history in the community, service population, services provided, and organizational resources. The survey also asked for respondents' opinions on issues related to the housing needs of returning prisoners as well as the needs of the organization. The survey methodology is provided in Appendix A. A copy of the survey can be found in Appendix B.

This report fills important gaps in information vital to the District's continuing efforts to implement effective strategies for reintegrating and supervising returning parolees. More specifically, this research has been developed to provide a framework for understanding what types of housing and housing support services exist in the geographic areas to which persons leaving prison return, and to document the needs of communities from the viewpoint of the service providers. The ultimate goal is to sharpen the community's thinking on the issue of housing and prisoner reintegration, and to foster policy innovations that will improve outcomes for individuals, families, and communities.

The report is organized as follows: First, we examine the national issue of reentry, describing the key issues, including the barriers facing returning prisoners across the country. Second, we discuss the reentry issues surrounding housing and homelessness, as well as current housing opportunities available to those leaving prison. Third, we examine prisoner reentry in the District Columbia, and describe the specific policy context in which District offenders are incarcerated and returned to their communities. This section also includes a discussion of current federally and locally funded reentry strategies taking place in the District. Fourth, we describe the results of the telephone survey of providers. And last, we conclude with a research summary and recommendations for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers.

The complete report is available in PDF format.

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.