The chapter identifies three problems in using the current research evidence in deciding what works in reentry. One problem is that there are few rigorous evaluations upon which to build a knowledge base of program features that are effective. A second problem is that virtually all of the evaluations of reentry programs thus far have used recidivism as the only outcome measured. The third problem is that the research findings do not fit the experiences of correctional practitioners, so they do not feel confident in applying the research findings. The author advises that practitioners and researchers must cooperate in creating postrelease programs that are substantively and administratively effective in addressing ex-offenders' economic well-being, housing, family stabilization and parenting, mental and physical health, and positive contributions to the community. The author notes that parole has received less research attention in recent years than any other domain of the correctional system. Without better information on what works in parole programming and supervision, the necessary funding will not be provided for parolee treatment services and job training. With better information on what parole can accomplish, corrections leaders might be able to persuade voters and elected officials to shift their support from punitive crime policies toward support for programs that help offenders become responsible citizens. 33 references