Variables are identified as
independent (resources and number of programs) and dependent (number of
offenses and ex-offenders). The distinction between variables provides
perspective; the research will control the input of the resources allocated in
reentry programs to interpret the relationships between the variables.
Information regarding offender records as well of type of crime was extracted
from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The type of criminal offense was
reduced five categories: robbery (n=26596), assault (n=44105), burglary
(n=112438), larceny (n=412911), and auto theft (n=54480), which have been
proposed by the Urban Institute as criminal acts with the highest tendency to
recidivate in the United States correctional systems.
The research is focused on
the fifteenth most populated counties in the state of Texas1,
but because the reentry programs offered throughout the state are not standardized
the counties with insufficient evidence of reentry program data were taken out
of the analysis. Correspondingly, the reentry program type was filtered to
those programs offering employment (n=245), housing (n=368), clothing (n=339),
counseling (n=129), and education (n=261) resources. Other reentry programs had
similar resources but could not be proven to specifically assist in the
By acknowledging each county
surface proportions, population density, and geographical regions, the ratio
and perspectives between offenders and numbers of criminal actions was
acquired. Harris and Dallas have a higher
density rate; to maintain a sustainable sample these two counties were kept out
when performing demographic analysis. Likewise, Montgomery County and
Williamson County have a socioeconomic stance that is above the average of the
other counties research. Counties that have a significantly low criminal
offense rate have serve for comparison purposes or to classify them as non-relatable
to the investigation.
In order to elevated the
research and acquire further analysis on social causes and consequences for
recidivism, indices of human capital, poverty, education, and income were added
to the analysis. The Median Household Income and Poverty Population percentage
were recuperated form the United States Census Bureau. The counties that
encounter strong relationships between their socioeconomic indices and recidivism
rates were further analyzed to identify tendencies and reentry program
The reentry programs offered
by the counties were collected from eleven databases2.
To ensure that the programs were active and serving, the databases selected
from national, state and local level, were cross-referenced finding a total of
2197 reentry programs. From
Harris, Dallas, Tarrant, Bexar, Travis, Collin, El Paso, Hidalgo, Denton, Fort
Bend, Montgomery, Williamson, Cameron, Nueces, and Brazoria.
utilize to extract reentry programs available in counties selected for the
study: (1) Texas Department of Criminal Justice, (2) Texas Offenders Reentry
Initiative, (3) Texas reentry Services, (4) Community Reentry Network, (5)
National Reentry Resource Center, (6) National Institute of Justice, (7) Bureau
of Justice Statistics, (8) Prison Fellowship, (9) Urban Institute, (10) Reentry
Council Program, (11) Human Rights Watch.