Boston Reentry Initiative: Reducing Recidivism Evidence-Based
This paper examines the Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI), a collaborative program developed by the Boston Police Department and Suffolk County Sheriff's Department to reduce recidivism among newly released offenders. The paper begins by contextualizing the problem: the United States incarcerates more citizens per capita than any other nation, yet nearly two-thirds of released prisoners reoffend within three years. It then summarizes the BRI's structure, selection criteria, and evidence-based rationale before offering a critique that highlights both the program's strengths and a significant limitation — namely, its failure to incorporate mental health screening into the offender selection process. The paper concludes that evidence-based reentry initiatives represent a sound investment of public resources.
- Introduction: U.S. recidivism crisis and BRI overview
- The Recidivism Problem and the BRI's Origins: Rising incarceration rates and reentry failures
- How the Boston Reentry Initiative Works: BRI structure, eligibility, and mentoring services
- Critique of the BRI's Selection Process: Subjective criteria flaws and missing mental health screening
- Conclusion: Evidence-based reentry as sound public investment
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its argument in concrete statistics — such as the 240% increase in incarceration rates and the 44% first-year reoffense rate — giving its claims immediate empirical weight.
- It maintains a balanced tone, acknowledging the BRI's genuine strengths before pivoting to a focused, evidence-supported critique rather than wholesale condemnation.
- The critique zeroes in on a single, well-defined weakness (the absence of mental health screening) rather than scattering objections, which keeps the argument coherent and persuasive.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of direct quotation from a primary empirical study (Braga et al., 2009) to ground both the summary and critique sections. By quoting the source's own language — especially the five subjective selection criteria — the author allows the evidence to speak for itself before adding analytical commentary, a technique that strengthens credibility without overstating the writer's own authority.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a classic four-part structure: an introduction that frames the national recidivism problem and states the paper's purpose; a summary section that describes the BRI's origins, scale, and selection process; a critique section that evaluates the initiative's strengths and identifies its primary limitation; and a brief conclusion that reaffirms the value of evidence-based reentry programs. This transparent organization makes the argument easy to follow and is well suited to an undergraduate criminal justice course.
Introduction
One of the ironies of the United States — the "Land of the Free" — is that this country incarcerates more of its citizens per capita than any other country on earth. While substantive changes are currently being envisioned for reforming the nation's criminal justice system, the harsh reality facing many lawbreakers has been the potential for lengthy prison sentences, even for some nonviolent offenses. Further exacerbating the problem are the numerous challenges that offenders face when they are released from incarceration back into the community.
Against this backdrop, it is not surprising that the recidivism rate for ex-offenders remains disturbingly high. Indeed, nearly 44% of all incarcerated persons reoffend during their first year, and more than two-thirds reoffend within three years following their release, despite increasingly aggressive efforts by public and private sector organizations to help these individuals make the transition to society successfully. One initiative that has shown promise in helping to reduce this alarming recidivism rate is the Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI) (Braga, Piehl & Hureau, 2009). This intervention provides a collaborative framework in which law enforcement agencies, social services agencies, and faith-based organizations can pool their resources to directly address the obstacles facing newly released offenders, in order to reduce their potential for reoffending and returning to prison.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a summary of the research and an overview of the Boston Police Department and Suffolk County Sheriff's Department's BRI, followed by a critique of the initiative and a conclusion that presents key findings about this timely effort to reduce recidivism rates in a major American city.
References
Braga, A. A., Piehl, A. M., & Hureau, D. (2009). Controlling violent offenders released to the community: An evaluation of the Boston reentry initiative. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 46(4), 411–436.
Can corrections heal? Reducing recidivism and increased public safety in Virginia. National Institute of Corrections. Retrieved from
Hooley, D. (2010, March 30). Six evidence-based practices proven to lower recidivism. Corrections1. Retrieved from https://www.corrections1.com/re-entry-and-recidivism/articles/6-evidence-based-practices-proven-to-lower-recidivism-MRzqFIO9P1okPNBF/.
Interventions for adult offenders with serious mental illness. (2013, August). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 121, 3-I, 1–15.
Lipsey, M. W., Wilson, D. B., & Cothern, L. (2009, April). Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders. U.S. Department of Justice Bulletin. Retrieved from
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.