Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI)
Adult Criminal Justice
Benefit-cost methods last updated December 2024. Literature review updated August 2016.
In 2003 the U.S. Department of Justice awarded funding to states for the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) for individuals transitioning from prison into the community. These programs do not adhere to one specific type of intervention or program but instead implement a model designed to address six outcomes of concern for individuals reentering from incarceration (health, education, employment, housing, substance use, and recidivism). SVORI involves a three-phase timeline model. The first phase is an in-prison intervention that could begin months before participants are released into the community. In the second phase, services intensify in the months before and after release. A risk/needs assessment for each participant is conducted and an individualized implementation plan is administered. In the third phase, participants are supervised within the community, and required to follow their implementation plan as a condition of release. Follow-ups are conducted with each participant at 3, 9, and 15 months post-release to address adherence to the plan and the current state of affairs for each participant.
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 |
|
|
Taxpayers |
$7,869 |
|
Benefits minus costs |
$95 |
|
|
Participants |
$0 |
|
Benefit to cost ratio |
$1.01 |
|
|
Others |
$14,865 |
|
Chance the program will produce |
|
|
|
Indirect |
($4,923) |
|
benefits greater than the costs |
51% |
|
|
Total benefits |
$17,810 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net program cost |
($17,715) |
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits minus cost |
$95 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
Taxpayers |
Participants |
Others2 |
Indirect3 |
Total
|
|
| Crime |
Criminal justice system |
$7,869 |
$0 |
$14,865 |
$3,934 |
$26,668 |
|
| Program cost |
Adjustment for deadweight cost of program |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
($8,857) |
($8,857) |
|
|
|
| Totals |
|
$7,869 |
$0 |
$14,865 |
($4,923) |
$17,810 |
|
Click here to see populations selected
Click here to hide populations selected
| Populations - Primary |
| Crime |
Adults previously confined – high risk Adults previously confined in a state prison who were classified as high risk for recidivism as measured on a risk assessment instrument |
| Earnings |
Previous criminal justice involvement All individuals with a previous arrest and booking |
For more information on populations see the
Technical Documentation
| Detailed Annual Cost Estimates Per Participant |
| Program costs |
$7,794 |
2007 |
Present value of net program costs (in 2023 dollars) |
($17,715) |
| Comparison costs |
$3,014 |
2007 |
Cost range (+ or -) |
10% |
Per-participant cost estimated from Cowell et al. (2009) and Lattimore et al. (2004). Cowell et al. (2009) presented a breakdown of the costs of both Adult and Juvenile SVORI program sites, by implementation phase. Lattimore et al. (2004) reported the specific breakdowns of program details by state, indicating that in Washington State, offenders spend 9 months in phase 1 (pre-release), 12 months in phase 2 (post-release), and 12 months in phase 3 (post-supervision), for a total of 33 months of programming. The cost-estimate presented here is the sum of the products of phase-specific cost estimates from Cowell et al. (2009) and the Washington State specific timeline from Lattimore et al. (2004).
Cowell, A. J., Lattimore, P. K., & Roman, J. (2009). Economic Evaluation of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative. United States.
Lattimore, P. K., Urban Institute., Research Triangle Institute., & National Institute of Justice (U.S.). (2004). National portrait of SVORI: Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative. Washington, DC: RTI International, Urban Institute.
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. |
| Benefits by Perspective Over Time (Cumulative Discounted Dollars) |
| The graph above illustrates the breakdown of the estimated cumulative benefits (not including program costs) per-participant for the first fifty years beyond the initial investment in the program. These cash flows provide a breakdown of the classification of dollars over time into four perspectives: taxpayer, participant, others, and indirect. “Taxpayers” includes expected savings to government and expected increases in tax revenue. “Participants” includes expected increases in earnings and expenditures for items such as health care and college tuition. “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. “Indirect benefits” includes estimates of the changes in the value of a statistical life and changes in the deadweight costs of taxation. If a section of the bar is below the $0 line, the program is creating a negative benefit, meaning a loss of value from that perspective. |
| Taxpayer Benefits by Source of Value Over Time (Cumulative Discounted Dollars) |
Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis
Veeh, C.A., Severson, M.E., & Lee, J. (2015). Evaluation of a serious and violent offender reentry initative (SVORI) program in a midwest state. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 1-17.
Lattimore, P.K., Barrick, K., Cowell, A., Dawes, D., Steffey, D., Tueller, S., & Visher, C.A. (2012). Prisoner reentry services: What worked for SVORI evaluation participants? U.S. Department of Justice.
Duwe, G. (2012). Evaluating the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP): Results from a randomized experiment. Justice Quarterly, 29(3).
Braga, A., Piehl, A., & Hureau, D. (2009). Controlling violent offenders released to the community: An evaluation of the Boston reentry initiative. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 46(4), 411-436.