Boston Reentry Initiative Essay

Noah Vasquez

The Boston Reentry Initiative program was created due to a wave of violence that purged the streets of Boston neighborhoods. In early 2000, Boston crime rates surged in almost every major category; aggravated assault, robbery and rape. This surge was occurring mainly in minority neighborhoods, which are categorized as high impact areas due to the susceptibility to crime caused by poverty and unemployment. During these times, there was also a 13% spike in firearm related crimes. The police commissioner did an analysis of the crimes and concluded that the cause of the violent crimes was mainly due to ex-offenders that returned home from the Suffolk County House of Corrections and committed more violent crimes upon their reintegration

to society. It seemed as though older inmates who returned home to these high impact areas were key players in the rise of crime.

The police commissioner sought to reduce the number of violent offenders and so called Superintendent Joyce to arm a joint law enforcement and community effort to aid in the fight against rising crime rates. The Boston Reentry Initiative was designed to ease the transition process for these high risk violent offenders at the Suffolk county house of corrections back into boston communities. Their goals were to reduce the rate of recidivism and give aid and support to ex criminals. Recidivism is the rate at which people who finish their sentences at a correctional facility later commit another crime upon reentering society that lands them back in jail. In order to give these individuals the support they needed so they would not become repeat offenders, the program provided mentors, case managers, social workers and vocational development workers to aid in the reintegration of

these individuals.
The Boston Reentry Initiative was a partnership with many community organizations and various law enforcement agencies. The groups involved ranged from criminal justice agencies to faith based organizations such as the Boston Police Department, Suffolk County House of Correction, Ella Baker house, Nation of Islam, Bruce Wall Ministries, Boston Ten Point Coalition, various parole and probation officers, various community centers, human services agencies that provided employment opportunities and workshops and community resources. The reason for such a broad stroke of involvement was that the superintendent wished to work with places with close knit communities and organizations that had strong voices of leadership that would help the communities and individuals build that bond that would potentially lower rates of crime. The way the program worked was that every month, Boston Police Department would choose around 20 men from Suffolk County House of Corrections ages 18-30. They must be residents of Boston and be considered high risk individuals. This means that they have a high chance of engaging in violent crime after being released from prison. The criteria for choosing individuals was largely subjective and evaluated through a variety of ways. The Suffolk County Regional Intelligence center examines all the intakes. They made subjective determinations and gauged the level of gang involvement, the level of violent crimes committed as well as cross referenced individuals through parole, probation, District Attorney and multiple other law enforcement agencies.
There are 3 key strategies that are implemented for this plan.

One being to focus on giving serious returning offenders resources that they could need, such as these caseworkers, workshops and open discussions. Second was to provide a public safely and social service approach. Creating alliances between community providers and law enforcement. Third was an intervention service, that was individualized to each offender. A panel discussion would be hosted within 45 days of an inmate’s entrance to the correctional facility. This panel was mostly law enforcement and crim agencies speaking about recidivism. Then, case workers and mentors from mostly faith based organizations like the ones listed above would work one on one with individuals and enumerate the resources that would be provided to them after release. They would develop transition plans with the individual and outline the services that could be provided if they agreed to enter the program. Services were mental health, substance abuse intervention, career counseling, job placement workshops, educational programs and transportation information. The inmate was given individual presentations by members that warned them about the consequences of returning to jail after being released. This panel and discussion was aimed at delivering support, and not accusing the individual, which made it unique to the programs out there. The panelists would pledge to help, and as esteemed leaders of these communities, at times ex

convicts, they seemed to have an impact on how individuals responded to the program. An individual reentry plan was then tailored and included potential goals and objectives for the inmate's life after jail. Those who did not keep their word, however, were subjected to strict enforcement and swift prosecution.