Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Wood, Jane L.; Kade, Cassandra; Sidhu, Mamta (2009)
Publisher: Routledge Journals
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: H
Between 2005 and 2007, the Kent and Medway Resettlement Programme (KMRP) piloted EXODUS (ex-offenders discharged under supervision), a multi-agency support system for identified prolific and priority offenders (IPPOs). Unlike traditional models of multi-agency support, EXODUS agencies work from the same location to maximize support for IPPOs, and inter- and intra-agency support for staff. This study assessed the perceived effectiveness of EXODUS. EXODUS staff and IPPOs were interviewed and their responses compared to those of traditional multi-agency support staff and IPPOs. Analysis showed that EXODUS IPPOs had committed fewer offences since receiving support than did comparison IPPOs. Neither group was more likely to be employed, but of those who were, EXODUS IPPOs were more likely to remain employed than comparison IPPOs. Most, regardless of type of support structure, recommended their programme and staff, although EXODUS IPPOs were more satisfied with the support they received. Staff believed that an expansion of the multi-agency approach was needed and that agency roles should be more clearly defined. EXODUS staff expressed higher efficacy in their own and colleagues’ ability to provide effective support and improved inter-agency relations and support from co-workers. However, EXODUS and comparison staff did not differ in levels of job satisfaction.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J. (2003). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct, 3rd Edition. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co.
    • Andrews, D.A. & Dowden, C. (2005). Managing correctional treatment for reduced recidivism: A meta-analytic review of programme integrity. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10, 173-87.
    • Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37 (2), 122 47.
    • Balzer, W.K., Kihm, J.A., Smith, P.C., Irwin, J.L., Bachiochi, P.D., Robie, C., Sinar, E.F. & Parra, L.F. (1997). Users' manual for the Job Descriptive Index (JDI; 1997 Revision) and the Job In General scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University.
    • Burnett, R. & Appleton, C. (2004). Joined-up services to tackle youth crime: A casestudy in England. British Journal of Criminology, 44, 34-54.
    • Carter, P. (2003). Managing Offenders, Reducing Crime. London: Strategy Unit.
    • Cinamon, K. & Hoskins, J. (2006). The prolific and other priority offender initiative in practice. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 53 (2), 154-66.
    • Cocker, S. (2005). Re-integrating the Bradford rioters: Lessons for NOMS and the future of resettlement. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 52 (3), 259-76.
    • Corrigan, P.W., McCracken, S.G., Kommana, S. & Edwards, M. (1996). Staff perceptions about barriers to innovative behavioural rehabilitation programs. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 20 (5), 541-51.
    • Crawford, A. (1998). Crime Prevention and Community Safety: Politics, policies and practices. Harlow, UK: Longman.
    • Crow, I. (2005). Does Work Do The Job? Safer Society, 26, 11-3.
    • Crowne, D.P. & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24 (4), 349-54.
    • Cullen, F.T., Wright, J.P. & Chamlin, M.B. (1999). Social support and social reform: A progressive crime control agenda. Crime and Delinquency, 45 (2), 188-207.
    • Dawson, P. (2007). The National PPO Evaluation - Research to Inform and Guide Practice. London: Home Office.
    • Dawson, P. & Cuppleditch, L. (2007). An Impact Assessment of the Prolific and Other Priority Offender Programme. London: Home Office.
    • Frude, N., Honess, T. & Maguire, M. (1994). CRIME-PICS II Manual. Cardiff: Michael and Associates.
    • Gendreau, P. & Cullen, F. (1994). Intensive rehabilitation supervision: The next generation in community corrections? Federal Probation, 58 (1), 72.
    • Harper, G. & Chitty, C. (2004). The Impact of Corrections on Re-offending: A review of . Home Office Research Study 291. London: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
    • Hatcher, R. & McGuire, J. (2001). Offence-focused problem-solving: Preliminary evaluation of a cognitive skills program. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 564- 87.
    • Hochstetler, A., Murphy, D.S. & Simons, R.L. (2004). Damaged goods: Exploring predictors of distress in prison inmates. Crime and Delinquency, 50 (3), 436-57.
    • Hollin, C.R. (1999). Treatment programs for offenders meta-a beyond. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 22 (3), 361 72.
    • Home Office (1999). . London: Home Office.
    • Home Office (2004a). Prolific and Other Priority Offender Strategy - Supplementary Guidance: Rehabilitation and resettle framework, September 2004. London: Home Office.
    • Home Office (2004b). Prolific and Other Priority Offender Strategy - Guidance Paper 3: Prevent and deter, September 2004. London: Home Office.
    • Home Office (2007). An Impact Assessment of the Prolific and Other Priority Offender Programme. London: Home Office.
    • Kemshall, H. & Maguire, M. (2001). Public Protection, Partnership and Risk Penalty: The multi-agency risk management of sexual and violent offenders. Punishment and Society, 3 (2), 237-64.
    • Krosnick, J.A. & Alwin, D.F. (1987). An evaluation of a cognitive theory of responseorder effects in survey measurement. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 51 (2), 201-19.
    • Lewis, S., Vennard, J., Maguire, M., Raynor, P., Vanstone, M., Raybould, S. & Rix, J. (2003). The Resettlement of Short-term Prisoners: An evaluation of seven pathfinders. Research, Development and Statistics Directorate Occasional Paper 83. London: Home Office.
    • Lewis, S., Maguire, M., Raynor, P., Vanstone, M. & Vennard, J. (2007). What works in resettlement? Findings from seven pathfinders for short-term prisoners in England and Wales. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 7 (1), 33-53.
    • Maruna, S. & Farrall, S. (2004). Desistance from crime: A theoretical reformulation. Köolner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 43, 171 94.
    • McMurran, M. & Ward, T. (2004). Motivating offenders to change in therapy: An organising framework. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9, 295-311.
    • Melvin, K.B., Grammling, L.K. & Gardner, W.M. (1985). A scale to measure attitudes towards prisoners. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 12, 241-52. and Wales. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 51 (1), 7-20.
    • Millie, A. & Erol, R. (2006). Rehabilitation and resettlement: A study of prolific offender case management in Birmingham, United Kingdom. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50 (6), 691-710.
    • Niven, S. & Olagundoye, J. (2002). Jobs and Homes: A survey of prisoners nearing release. Home Office Research Findings No. 173. London: Home Office.
    • Niven, S. & Stewart, D. (2005). Resettlement Outcomes on Release from Prison in 2003. London: Home Office.
    • Pearson, G., Blagg, H., Smith, D., Sampson, A. & Strubbs, P. (1992). Crime, community and conflict: The multi-agency approach. In D. Downes (ed.), Unravelling Criminal Justice. Basingstoke; Macmillan.
    • Pitts, J. (2001). Korrectional karaoke: New Labour and the zombification of youth justice. Youth Justice, 1 (2), 3-16.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article