Abrams, Shannon, and Sangalang (2007) explored the benefits and limitations of a six-week transitional living program for incarcerated youth offenders by interviewing the program’s staff and youth that participated. In the study, the interviews suggested that both groups believed that the transitional program had many benefits, for independent skills training. During the interviews, incarcerated youth discussed how they had gained specific practical skills that gave them more independence and inspirational goals for pursuing vocation and education. Additionally, they felt in the supportive setting they were placed in, they gained opportunities to develop positive relationship with adults, reinforced cognitive-based refusal skills. Despite…show more content… 32 percent of the group study had enrolled in an educational program. 76 percent of the study group had experiences no further court involvement. Student’s earning of vocational certificate and/or a GED increased the chance of gaining employment. Students that were identified as handicapped were equipped with special education services were more likely to find employment post-release than those who were no identified as handicapped. Those who identified as substance abusers were less likely to be enrolled in school yet more likely to be employed than those that did not identify as substance abusers. Identified substance abusers were also more likely to recidivate than non-identified drug users. The last conclusion, the researchers had found was that students who stayed the shortest in the transitional program were more likely to recidivate than those who had stayed longer in the program. Based on the findings, the researchers concluded that academic preparation and vocational skills building highly correlates to reducing recidivism and successful development among incarcerated…show more content… Like Job Corps, Jobstart provided basic skills education, occupational training, support services, and job placement assistance to young, low skilled school dropouts but on a lower level of intensity and in a non-residential settings. In their study, the treatment group of 988 youths receiving Jobstart services had no significant outcomes than the control group of 953 youths that received no services. For education, in the treatment group, 42% of youth earned a high school diploma or GED equivalent compare to 28.6% of the control group. Youthstart youths were given educational classes and more chances to take the GED tests. In terms of employment, after a 12-month follow-up, 56.5% of the treatment group had worked at some point in the year, compared to 60.8% of the control group. In a 24-month follow-up though, 71% of the treatment group had worked, with 67.5% in the control group. But in the third and fourth years of follow-up, no distinctive differences were shown in employment between the two groups. In earnings, after a 1-year follow-up, the treatment group had earned less than average than the control group. Until the third and fourth year follow-up, the treatment group had earned more than the control group, with
