Contrato de locación de servicios

Until recently, there was a notable absence of recidivism research in Ireland. The absence of a centralised prison data system (prior to 2000), and a lack of a unique universal criminal justice identifier have contributed significantly to this dearth of research (O'Donnell et al., 2008). Of late, research in the area has improved. Since 2012 both the Irish Prison and Probation Services have also completed national recidivism research. The first national recidivism study was published in 2008. Previously, small studies using both Irish prison and probation data were completed. There are however, a number of limitations to small scale recidivism studies. For the most part they lack

95

generalisability, do not include female offenders and use re-conviction or re-

imprisonment data alone, making it difficult to calculate crime-free periods. Results of available Irish studies are outlined below.

A number of smaller recidivism studies using probation populations include Ian Hart’s (1974) work on behalf of The Economic and Social Research Institute. This study examined re-conviction among a small number of male juvenile probationers. Results showed that 58 percent of the total 150 juvenile participants were re-convicted within the study’s three and a half year follow-up period. Hart used self-report offending data to supplement a primarily qualitative study. More recently, Healy (2012) conducted a mixed methods study examining desistance among 73 probationers from five probation teams in Dublin. Participants aged between 18 to 35 years had committed a variety of crimes including: assault (10.9 percent), robbery (20.5 percent), drug offences (19.2 percent), and larceny (17.8 percent). Approximately one third were unemployed, and the majority were resident in their parental home at the time of interview. A 66 percent re-conviction rate over a 4.8 year period was detected. The average time to re-

conviction of those who reoffended was just over two years. This gap in offending is contrary to much recidivism research, and findings may be attributable to the slow judicial process in Ireland, therefore the use of re-arrest data may be more applicable to Irish recidivism studies. This point will be discussed in Chapter Four.

Another small scale study using Irish Prison Service data involved the evaluation of the sex offender treatment programme at Arbour Hill Prison (O'Reilly & McDonald, 2009). The authors reported a sexual recidivism rate (re-conviction for a sexual offence) of 8.1 percent, a violent non-sexual recidivism rate of 7.3 percent and a non-violent non-sexual recidivism rate of 24.6 percent over varying follow-up periods (one to 121 months), among 248 prisoners released in 2008. No intervention effects between treated and

96

untreated groups were detected in any of the three re-offence categories. Investigation of some offender characteristics showed that time to re-offence was longer for older participants. Younger participants with more non-sexual previous offences had higher rates of violent re-offending. Authors manually accessed An Garda Síochána’s PULSE (Police Using Leading Systems Effectively) system to assess re-offending among study participants. This was a time-consuming and laborious exercise, made possible only by the small number of study participants.

Ireland’s first national recidivism study examined re-imprisonment rates of prisoners released between January 1st 2001 and November 30th 2004. This totalled 19,955 releases equating to 14,485 individuals (O'Donnell et al., 2008). The electronic recording and centralisation of key offender and offence information in 2000 enabled O’Donnell et al. to complete the first ever large-scale recidivism study of Irish

prisoners. An examination of sample demographics revealed an average age at release of 30 years. The majority of the sample was male, unmarried and unemployed prior to their incarceration. Inspection of release rates showed that approximately the same number of releases occurred over each of the four years. Forty two percent of the sample had previous prison experience, however this could have included experience of prison remand, as authors were unable to differentiate. The authors calculated that 56 percent of their sample served sentences or were held on remand for less than three months. In order to calculate recidivism rates, survival regression analysis using the Kaplan-Meier nonparametric survivor function was used to account for differences in the follow-up times, as well as numerous release dates for individuals. As outlined above, the use of relatively short prison sentences meant that during the four-year study period a number of individuals were released and re-imprisoned on numerous

97

within one year, increasing to approximately half during the four-year follow-up period (O'Donnell et al., 2008).

Re-imprisonment is only one measure of recidivism, and captures only the most serious re-offences; not all re-offences are detected, and a small proportion will result in

conviction and imprisonment. Timing is also an issue; there may be a considerable time lag between the date of re-offence and date of incarceration (Maltz, 1984). O’Donnell et al. argue that a sample of released prisoners by virtue of their previous prison experience are more likely to receive a custodial sanction, therefore increasing the predictive validity of using re-imprisonment instead of reconviction. The authors found significantly higher rates of recidivism among male ex-prisoners, those without formal education, and those who had reported being unemployed on prison entry. Age was also a significant moderator to re-offending, with younger offenders re-offending at

significantly higher rates.

More recently, the Irish Prison and Probation Services have published national

recidivism studies in conjunction with the crime division of the Central Statistics Office. The Irish Prison Service have tracked all prisoners who completed a sentence during 2007, 2008 and most recently 2009. Re-conviction within three years was used as the measure of recidivism. As will be discussed in section 4.3.2, a unique universal identifier is not used across all Irish criminal justice agencies, therefore, in order to assess reconviction, a linking procedure was carried out between national police data (An Garda Síochána records), Court Service data and Irish Prison Service data. A full description of linking procedures can be found in section 4.3.2.4. Across the 2007 sample, 62 percent reoffended; 51 percent of the 2008 sample were re-convicted and of the 2009 cohort, 48 percent were re-convicted within three years. The majority of these re-offences occurred within the first six months of release. Examining predictors of

98

recidivism, males had higher rates of re-offending compared to female offenders. Males, however, accounted for approximately 92 percent of the population studied in each year (Central Statistics Office, 2013a, 2015a; Irish Prison Service, 2013).

Similarly, the Probation Service in conjunction with the Central Statistics Office have examined the recidivism rates of offenders in receipt of a probation order (PO) or CSO in 2007, 2008 and 2009. As previously discussed, community service within the Irish legislative framework is considered a punitive, rather than rehabilitative measure, although its purposes are somewhat unclear, while a PO is designed to address the multiple needs of particular offenders (The Probation Service, 2012b). The Irish Prison Service study also used re-conviction as an outcome measure using a similar linking procedure (see section 4.3.2.4). Originally a reference period of two years from the date of imposition of either order was utilised for the 2007 cohort. This was increased to three years for the 2008 and 2009 cohorts. For the 2007 sample the combined rate of recidivism was 37.2 percent; analyses revealed a rate of 39.3 percent for the PO cohort compared to 33.5 percent for the CSO group (The Probation Service, 2012b). The overall recidivism rate of offenders in the 2008 study was 41 percent, however the reference period was extended to a three year period for this cohort. For the 2009 group this rate fell to 37 percent within a three year reference period. Akin to findings from the Irish Prison Service, recidivism was higher among male offenders and also decreased with age. Across all three studies the highest rates were seen among those under 18 years and the lowest among those aged 45 or more. Further analysis of these particular offenders is therefore warranted. Unfortunately, analysis by particular order was not provided (Central Statistics Office, 2015b; The Probation Service, 2013c).

Irish Prison and Probation Services studies are not comparable due to the inclusion and exclusion of particular offences, especially driving offences and a lack of statistical

99

matching between groups. However, among prison and probation groups the majority of re-offending took place within the first year of release or imposition of a

community/probation order. Both the Irish Prison and Probation Services (2013) have pledged to monitor recidivism as part of their joint working strategy.