skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 134287 Find in a Library
Title: Furloughs and Recidivism
Journal: Research Forum  Volume:1  Issue:1  Dated:(April 1991)  Pages:1-5
Author(s): L C Eichenlaub
Date Published: 1991
Page Count: 5
Sponsoring Agency: Federal Bureau of Prisons
Washington, DC 20534
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Survey
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Recidivism information from a sample of offenders released from Federal prisons in 1982 was analyzed to determine the relationship between recidivism and receiving furloughs prior to release.
Abstract: The analysis used arrest data for a sample of offenders who had all served sentences of longer than 1 year. The analysis covered a 3-year followup period. Results revealed that inmates receiving social furloughs had significantly lower recidivism rates than inmates who had not been furloughed. Even when the effects of other variables such as recidivism risk on the Salient Factor Score, age, race, time served, gender, and type of offense were considered, the furloughed group experienced greater post-release success. The recidivism rate was 32.6 percent for those granted social furloughs and 52.9 percent for those who had no furlough. Possible explanations for the differences include the furloughed offenders' ability to maintain family and community ties, the soundness of the decisions regarding which offenders to furlough, or, most likely, a combination of these two explanations. Figures, table, and footnotes
Main Term(s): Furloughs; Recidivism prediction
Index Term(s): Corrections effectiveness; Corrections policies; Federal prisoners; Recidivism causes
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 website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.