Recidivism among offenders with developmental disabilities participating in a case management program.
A community case-management program cut arrests almost in half for adults with developmental disabilities.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team tracked adults with developmental disabilities who were in trouble with the law.
Everyone joined a case-management program. No one was turned away.
Arrest records were counted before and after the program.
What they found
Program finishers were arrested less often. The rate dropped from 43% to 25%.
Most new arrests were for small offenses, not serious crimes.
How this fits with other research
Sayers et al. (1995) ran a similar community-support program. They also saw good behavior gains, but they looked at challenging behavior, not crime.
Geurts et al. (2008) found that youth with intellectual disability are at higher risk for re-offense. Their warning fits with this study: support must continue after the program ends.
Wetterneck et al. (2006) followed adults leaving a secure hospital. Only 11% were reconvicted, yet over half still showed "offending-like" habits. Together these papers show: arrests can fall, but subtle problem behaviors often remain.
Why it matters
You can tell funders that case management is a money-smart safety tool. It nearly halves arrest rates for adults with developmental disabilities. Build long-term follow-up into your behavior plans, because risk does not drop to zero. Partner with probation officers so minor slips are caught early, before they become new charges.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a monthly check-in with your client’s probation officer to review police contact logs.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
This study examined recidivism, defined as arrests, among 252 clients who were accepted into a case management program for offenders with developmental disabilities. Overall, 40% of clients were arrested while participating in the program, and 34% were arrested within 6 months after case closure. The crimes for which clients were arrested tended to be minor: 21% were for probation or parole violations not associated with new criminal acts, 39% were for misdemeanors, 27% were nonviolent felonies, and 12% were for felonies against persons. Clients who completed the program (N=115) were less likely to be arrested after case closure than those who dropped out of the program (N=112), 25 and 43%, respectively. Other factors associated with arrests after case closure included having a developmental disability other than mental retardation, living in an urban area, being referred to the program by a criminal justice agency or through a private referral rather than a social service agency, and being arrested while in the program. Implications are discussed for service provision and evaluation of programs that work with offenders with developmental disabilities.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2003 · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(03)00029-5