Addressing Barriers to Housing in Reentry Programs Working to Address a Variety of Needs: A Qualitative Study of Second Chance Act Grantees

• NCJ Number: 307451
• Journal: Cityscape Volume: 25 Issue: 2 Dated: 2023
• Author(s): Elizabeth L. Beck; Natasha N. Johnson; Sommer Delgado; Victoria Helmly; Susan A. McLaren; Alice Prendergast; Leigh Alderman; Lorenzo Almada; Brian Bride; Eric Napierala; William J. Sabol
• Date Published: 2023
• Length: 21 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2020-CZ-BX-0014
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored
• Publication Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
• Award: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Second Chance Act Grant Program through a Phased Evaluation Approach Using an Implementation Science Mixed Methods Approach

Annotation

This study of barriers to housing in reentry programs used data from an evaluation of three Second Chance Act grantees and explored formerly incarcerated people’s (FIP) access to housing. Through this work, highlighting program efforts to remove barriers to housing for this population, the study seeks to promote the advancement of relevant policy, practice, and research in this arena.

Abstract

Using data from an evaluation of three Second Chance Act grantees, the authors explore formerly incarcerated people’s (FIP) access to housing. Through this work, highlighting program efforts to remove barriers to housing for this population, the study seeks to promote the advancement of relevant policy, practice, and research in this arena. This study is unique in that it includes the perspectives of individuals with lived experiences and the insights of the reentry program providers working to meet their overall needs, including in the area of housing. The data come from reentry programs in three regions of the United States. Although the needs of the people with lived experiences have similarities, regional differences exist, particularly related to housing costs and supply, including the availability of transitional housing. Also, variations exist between FIP who are able to live with family compared with those who do not have this option. The three programs this study examined worked to address housing needs in distinctive ways and explores the housing needs of FIP and the strategies the three programs use to address these needs. Incorporating a two-pronged approach, this article includes analyses of (1) interview data with 31 FIP from 3 months to 3 years post-incarceration and (2) interviews and program materials to support formulative case analyses of the housing-related work that program enacted. (Published Abstract Provided)