Research on the impact of residency restrictions for sex offenders in the community has increasingly found little or no influence of such restrictions on reoffending, while they create negative consequences. States that have laws with residency restrictions for sex offenders should repeal them, and all States should examine existing research on the effects of various prevention measures before mandating particular measures. A 2005 study in Colorado found that sex offenders against children who reoffended while under parole supervision were scattered throughout the study area and did not live closer to child-concentrated areas than those who did not reoffend. A 2003 Minnesota study found no relationship between a sex offender's living close to schools or parks and his reoffending. Further, the Minnesota study found that sex offenders were more likely to seek victims in neighborhoods at some distance from where they lived in order to reduce their risk of being identified. Negative consequences of residency restrictions are the clustering of sex offenders in the few areas where they are permitted to live, homelessness, and transience. Policies more likely to be effective in preventing reoffending by sex offenders, particularly against children, are to provide children and their caregivers with information on protective measures while providing increased monitoring and treatment for sex offenders living in communities. 20 references