skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 242013     Find in a Library
Title: Ending Mass Incarceration Charting a New Justice Reinvestment
  Document URL: PDF 
Author(s): James Austin ; Eric Cadora ; Todd R. Clear ; Kara Dansky ; Judith Greene ; Vanita Gupta ; Marc Mauer ; Nicole Porter ; Susan Tucker ; Malcolm C. Young
Date Published: 04/2013
Page Count: 36
  Annotation: This report assesses the performance of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI) in its efforts to educate State legislators and public officials about the consequences of four decades of mass incarceration for the cost-effectiveness of corrections and to persuade them to undertake reforms not previously considered.
Abstract: The JRI was conceived as part of the solution to the destructive effects of mass incarceration and harsh punishment that disproportionately impacts individuals and communities of color. Its initial intent was to reduce corrections populations and budgets so as to generate savings that would be reinvested in communities with high incarceration rates, making them safer, more prosperous, and equitable. Increasingly, JRI’s agenda has moved away from these progressive goals, as it has focused on reducing the rate of prison growth rather than a reduction in the number of individuals currently incarcerated. Consequently, instead of producing savings for reinvestment in communities with high incarceration rates, in too many locations the avoidance of projected prison growth has become more politically feasible than reducing the current number of prisoners. Possible savings from such a current reduction in prison costs have been either returned to the general coffers of States or used to augment community corrections, leaving high-risk communities largely unchanged. By focusing on State-level political and administrative policymakers, the JRI process has too often marginalized well-established local advocates and justice reformers who have a vested interest in promoting long-term implementation oversight that will ensure the sustainability of reforms. This period of reassessment of JRI’s impact and objectives is important for guiding its investments and leadership toward significant reductions in U.S. corrections populations and costs through smart, targeted, and locally determined reinvestments that will aid in repairing the destructive and criminogenic impact of high rates of concentrated incarceration for poor communities of color. 5 figures, 1 table, and appended case studies in the early history of the JRI and ways to reduce the juvenile justice population
Main Term(s): Correctional reform
Index Term(s): Community resources ; Economic influences ; Social conditions ; Capital investment ; Cost effectiveness analysis ; Community crime prevention programs ; Alternatives to institutionalization ; Corrections effectiveness ; Minority overrepresentation
Sale Source: Sentencing Project
1705 DeSales Street, NW
8th Floor
Washington, DC 20036
United States of America
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Country: United States of America
Language: English
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.