Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Crime & Delinquency
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0011128707301628v1
54/4/614    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duwe, G.
Right arrow Articles by Kerschner, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Removing a Nail From the Boot Camp Coffin

An Outcome Evaluation of Minnesota's Challenge Incarceration Program

Grant Duwe

Minnesota Department of Corrections, St. Paul

Deborah Kerschner

Minnesota Department of Corrections, St. Paul

Using a retrospective, quasiexperimental design, this study evaluates Minnesota's Challenge Incarceration Program (CIP), examining whether it has lowered recidivism and saved money. In addition to utilizing a lengthy follow-up period and multiple measures of recidivism and participation, a multistage sampling design was employed to create a control group that was not significantly different from the CIP group with respect to control variables. The results reveal that although CIP significantly reduced the time to reoffense, it did not have a significant effect when recidivism was measured as any return to prison. CIP reduced costs through a recidivism reduction, however, because when CIP offenders returned to prison, they stayed 40 fewer days than control group offenders because they were less likely to return for a new crime. Overall, the analyses show that CIP has saved Minnesota at least $6.2 million by providing early release to program graduates and reducing the time they later spend in prison.

Key Words: boot camps • recidivism • cost-benefit analysis • correctional program evaluation

This version was published on October 1, 2008

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 54, No. 4, 614-643 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128707301628
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?