Evaluation of Reentry-Based Restorative Justice: A Randomized Controlled Trial, Detroit, Michigan, 2019-2024 (ICPSR 39600)

Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)

Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes

Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose

The goal of this project was to evaluate the effectiveness of family group conferencing (FGC) for individuals involved in the criminal justice system and their families. Study objectives included: (1) a process evaluation that includes a focus on fidelity of implementation, (2) an impact evaluation using a randomized controlled design, and (3) a study of the costs and benefits of the intervention.

Study Design View help for Study Design

The FGC followed International Institute for Restorative Practices guidelines for best practices in restorative justice:

• FGC is voluntary for all stakeholders.
• The criminal justice-involved individual must take full responsibility for his or her crime.
• The crime must have caused harm to the family, and there must be a need to repair that harm.
• Conferences and preconference preparation are conducted by an International Institute for Restorative Practices-trained facilitator and follow a consistent, scripted model.

Two teams carried out the evaluation in collaboration with one another. The Design and Analysis Team designed data collection protocols and instruments, and the random assignment of participants to the treatment and control groups. The Intervention Team enrolled participants into the study, ensured the fidelity of the delivery of the FGC, and collected survey data from study participants.

When entering the reentry facility, individuals went through an intake process, including an orientation to FGC. The orientation, like other phases of conference preparation, incorporated restorative elements itself (e.g., asking clients to reflect on the harm they caused to their families, using affective questions and statements, sitting in a circle, using a talking piece, taking responsibility, and discussing making amends). The primary goal of these initial steps, referred to as restorative practices, is to initiate a reflective process in which clients can think deeply about the harm their actions have caused others and how they can begin to repair it. Restorative justice, on the other hand, refers specifically to the face-to-face conference itself.

Individuals must have met two criteria before enrolling in the FGC evaluation. First, participants must volunteer and be determined eligible for conferencing. Second, the person's family members must also volunteer and be determined eligible. Then random assignment occurred at this point. The treatment group participated in the FGC while the control group did not. Both groups completed a survey prior to release from reentry. Interviews were completed six months after release. Then data from law enforcement and corrections were collected for recidivism analysis.

The evaluation consisted of three components: process analysis, impact analysis, and cost analysis. The process analysis sought to understand how participants perceived their treatment throughout the program and its helpfulness. A combination of closed- and open-ended survey responses from FGC participants were collected. Impact analysis consisted of measuring whether FGC produced measurable improvements in psychosocial and recidivism outcomes. Psychosocial measures covered belief in redeemability, criminal identity/core self, empathy/remorse/accountability, and generativity. Recidivism was assessed through administrative data provided by the Michigan Department of Corrections about new offenses or technical violations that resulted in the participant being reincarcerated or placed on probation from the time of their release until December 31, 2024. The cost analysis examined the dollar value of resources invested in the intervention compared with the dollar value of benefits. Monetized benefits were calculated by referencing estimated effects of FGC on criminal justice system outcomes based on published estimates of the averted costs to the justice system attributed to prevention of recidivism.

Sample View help for Sample

During their first week in a Self-Help Addiction Rehabilitation facility, clients were recruited to participate in this study. If a client agreed to participate, they then went through a screening process which included assessing client appropriateness for the intervention and contacting families to verify their willingness to take part in FGC. After clients passed the screening stage, they were then randomly assigned to participate in FGC or to be in the control group.

Time Method View help for Time Method

Universe View help for Universe

Individuals participating in FGC in Detroit, Michigan from 2019 to 2024.

Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation

Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection

Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales

All scales used in the study are listed in the Map of Constructs to Survey Items table in the Questionnaire. Please refer to the Questionnaire, available under the 'Data and Documentation' tab, for details.

Original Release Date View help for Original Release Date

2026-04-16

Version History View help for Version History

Weight View help for Weight

Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to minimize pre-existing baseline differences between the Treatment and Comparison groups. The variable TX_COMP_WEIGHT uses IPTW weights for the Treatment versus Comparison group model, and CTRL_COMP_WEIGHT uses IPTW weights for the Control versus Comparison group model. Both variables are contained within the Recidivism Dataset.