Back Button

Post-incarceration housing assistance

Adult Criminal Justice
Benefit-cost methods last updated December 2024.  Literature review updated August 2024.
Housing assistance programs provide vouchers or subsidies for individuals reentering the community after a period of incarceration. They are intended to mitigate the negative impacts of homelessness and housing instability during the reentry process. Housing assistance programs may, but do not always, include other services such as job training, employment assistance, or substance abuse treatment in addition to housing vouchers or subsidies. To be included in this analysis, housing vouchers must have been voluntary and provided housing support for at least one month following release.

Housing assistance programs are distinct from community-based correctional facilities in the following ways: 1) they do not provide formal supervision in the community; 2) recipients are not required to participate in the provided treatment and programming services; and 3) violation of supervision conditions in these programs is not automatically grounds for parole or probation revocation. Community-based correctional facilities are not included in this analysis; they are analyzed separately.
 
ALL
BENEFIT-COST
META-ANALYSIS
CITATIONS
For an overview of WSIPP's Benefit-Cost Model, please see this guide. The estimates shown are present value, life cycle benefits and costs. All dollars are expressed in the base year chosen for this analysis (2023).  The chance the benefits exceed the costs are derived from a Monte Carlo risk analysis. The details on this, as well as the economic discount rates and other relevant parameters are described in our Technical Documentation.
Benefit-Cost Summary Statistics Per Participant
Benefits to:
Taxpayers ($2,205) Benefits minus costs $560
Participants $4,671 Benefit to cost ratio $1.12
Others $5,981 Chance the program will produce
Indirect ($3,364) benefits greater than the costs 53%
Total benefits $5,083
Net program cost ($4,523)
Benefits minus cost $560

^WSIPP’s benefit-cost model does not monetize this outcome.

^^WSIPP does not include this outcome when conducting benefit-cost analysis for this program.

Meta-analysis is a statistical method to combine the results from separate studies on a program, policy, or topic to estimate its effect on an outcome. WSIPP systematically evaluates all credible evaluations we can locate on each topic. The outcomes measured are the program impacts measured in the research literature (for example, impacts on crime or educational attainment). Treatment N represents the total number of individuals or units in the treatment group across the included studies.

An effect size (ES) is a standard metric that summarizes the degree to which a program or policy affects a measured outcome. If the effect size is positive, the outcome increases. If the effect size is negative, the outcome decreases. See Estimating Program Effects Using Effect Sizes for additional information on how we estimate effect sizes.

The effect size may be adjusted from the unadjusted effect size estimated in the meta-analysis. Historically, WSIPP adjusted effect sizes to some programs based on the methodological characteristics of the study. For programs reviewed in 2024 or later, we do not make additional adjustments, and we use the unadjusted effect size whenever we run a benefit-cost analysis.

Research shows the magnitude of effects may change over time. For those effect sizes, we estimate outcome-based adjustments, which we apply between the first time ES is estimated and the second time ES is estimated. More details about these adjustments can be found in our Technical Documentation.

Meta-Analysis of Program Effects
Outcomes measured Treatment age No. of effect sizes Treatment N Effect sizes (ES) and standard errors (SE) used in the benefit-cost analysis Unadjusted effect size (random effects model)
First time ES is estimated Second time ES is estimated
ES SE Age ES SE Age ES p-value
Crime
Involvement in the criminal justice system (e.g., arrests, charges, convictions, incarceration) measured through administrative records (e.g. court records, arrests) or self-report.
 39 8 6102 -0.111 0.057 40 -0.111 0.057 48 -0.111 0.052
Employment^^
Any employment, including part-time work.
39 1 3276 0.277 0.021 40 n/a n/a n/a 0.277 0.001
Homelessness^
A lack of stable housing, often measured through self-report of conditions like living on streets or in shelters in a given time period.
 39 2 4792 -0.128 0.093 40 n/a n/a n/a -0.128 0.001
Food assistance
Receipt of food assistance, such as from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
 39 1 3277 0.425 0.022 40 0.425 0.022 40 0.425 0.001
Aged blind disabled assistance
Receipt of cash assistance to eligible low income adults through the Aged, Blind and Disability (ABD) program.
 39 1 3254 0.148 0.021 40 0.148 0.021 40 0.148 0.001
1In addition to the outcomes measured in the meta-analysis table, WSIPP measures benefits and costs estimated from other outcomes associated with those reported in the evaluation literature. For example, empirical research demonstrates that high school graduation leads to reduced crime. These associated measures provide a more complete picture of the detailed costs and benefits of the program.

2“Others” includes benefits to people other than taxpayers and participants. Depending on the program, it could include reductions in crime victimization, the economic benefits from a more educated workforce, and the benefits from employer-paid health insurance.

3“Indirect benefits” includes estimates of the net changes in the value of a statistical life and net changes in the deadweight costs of taxation.
Detailed Monetary Benefit Estimates Per Participant
Affected outcome: Resulting benefits:1 Benefits accrue to:
Taxpayers Participants Others2 Indirect3 Total
Crime Criminal justice system $3,140 $0 $5,981 $1,570 $10,690
Food assistance Food assistance ($4,133) $3,610 $0 ($2,067) ($2,590)
Aged blind disabled assistance Aged blind disabled assistance ($1,212) $1,061 $0 ($606) ($756)
Program cost Adjustment for deadweight cost of program $0 $0 $0 ($2,262) ($2,262)
Totals ($2,205) $4,671 $5,981 ($3,364) $5,083
Click here to see populations selected
Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant
Annual cost Year dollars Summary
Program costs $4,523 2023 Present value of net program costs (in 2023 dollars) ($4,523)
Comparison costs $0 2023 Cost range (+ or -) 10%
Total program costs were provided by the Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) from July 2023 through June 2024. Costs included direct participant support and administrative costs associated with operating the program. Per participant costs were calculated by dividing the total program costs by the total number of people who received housing vouchers during this period.
The figures shown are estimates of the costs to implement programs in Washington. The comparison group costs reflect either no treatment or treatment as usual, depending on how effect sizes were calculated in the meta-analysis. The cost range reported above reflects potential variation or uncertainty in the cost estimate; more detail can be found in our Technical Documentation.
Benefits Minus Costs
Benefits by Perspective
Taxpayer Benefits by Source of Value
Benefits Minus Costs Over Time (Cumulative Discounted Dollars)
The graph above illustrates the estimated cumulative net benefits per-participant for the first fifty years beyond the initial investment in the program. We present these cash flows in discounted dollars. If the dollars are negative (bars below $0 line), the cumulative benefits do not outweigh the cost of the program up to that point in time. The program breaks even when the dollars reach $0. At this point, the total benefits to participants, taxpayers, and others, are equal to the cost of the program. If the dollars are above $0, the benefits of the program exceed the initial investment.

Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis

Hamilton, Z., Kigerl, A., & Hays, Z. (2015). Removing release impediments and reducing correctional costs: Evaluation of Washington State’s Housing Voucher Program. Justice Quarterly, 32(2), 255–287.

Helfgott, J., & Gunnison, E. (2023). Gender-responsive services for women leaving prison: The IF Project’s Seattle Women’s Reentry Initiative. Corrections.

Kirk, D.B., Geoffrey C., Hyatt, Jordan M., Kearley, B.W. (2017). The impact of residential change and housing stability on recidivism: Pilot results from the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE). Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14(2), 213–226.

Lam, A.C., Wendt, S.J., Grant, A., Tran, J., Lolashvili, G., Durodoye, R., & Hanson, T. (2022). Evaluation of the Alameda County Justice Restoration Project: Final report.

McNeeley, S. (2021). A long-term follow-up evaluation of an employment assistance reentry program. Justice Evaluation Journal, 5(1), 90–108.

Pedneault, A., Hamilton, Z., Kigerl, A., Pimley, N., & Choi, E. (2017). Evaluation of Washington State Department of Corrections (WADOC) Second Chance Act–Continuum of Care Pilot Program: Process, outcome and cost-benefit evaluation.

Taniguchi, T., & Hardenbergh, L. (2025). Housing vouchers upon release from DOC custody: Relationship to homelessness, public benefits, employment, and recidivism (Doc. No. 26-01–1901). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.