16Policy ReviewErika TallentSOCW 636

1
6
Policy Review
Erika Tallent
SOCW 6361
Issue Statement
When people are released from prison, they face an environment
that is difficult to navigate, designed to keep them from
becoming useful members of their communities. Most ex-
offenders are arrested again within three years of their release,
with a majority of 77 percent of instances occurring within five
years. As the nation's prison population approaches 2 million
inmates, recidivism is becoming an issue for both convicts'
families and society (Bhandari, 2019). This explains why social
reintegration is one of the biggest social problems in the United
States. Re-incarceration and unsuccessful re-entry have a
devastating impact on communities, families, and individuals.

Ex-offenders and those recently released from prison are the
most vulnerable populations to this social problem. It is vital to
have a thorough grasp of the science of offender reintegration
since efficient reintegration of offenders is crucial to crime
reduction.
The need for change
After being released from prison, offenders are pushed into a
new environment that is very different from their previous one,
and many struggle to adapt. Aside from that, due to the dynamic
and the always-changing environment, ex-offenders who have
spent considerable time in prison are liberated into an
environment vastly different from their prior surroundings. This
is a serious impediment to criminals' reintegration back into
society. Furthermore, re-entry into the workforce is a
significant challenge to overcome for persons who have served
time in jail. Previously imprisoned individuals have difficulties
getting and maintaining employment after being released from
prison due to employers' apprehension about hiring people with
criminal histories (Weber, 2021). Many offenders have no
formal education or work experience, making it strenuous to
obtain gainful employment. According to studies, about 60% of
criminals and ex-offenders are high school dropouts.
In the aftermath of their imprisonment and engagement with the
criminal justice system, many ex-inmates are perceived
unproductive and risky by former employers and members of
their old professional networks, assuming they ever had one.
When ex-convicts combine a restricted professional network
with a glaring gap in their resume, it may be very difficult for
them to get an interview with a potential employer. An
estimated 70 percent of previously jailed males have a history
of drug misuse, and a large number of them suffer from physical
and mental health problems (Petrich et al., 2022). As a result,
employers may not consider them "work-ready," so restricting
their employability. The prospect of being sued for damages
resulting from "negligent hiring" is a source of anxiety for
many firms. Given the possibility that a firm could be held

responsible for exposing the employees to a potentially harmful
individual, many companies are wary of hiring someone who
has a criminal history. This is why lawmakers, the public, and
social workers need to advocate for change so that ex-offenders
can get a conducive environment that will allow them to
smoothly reintegrate back into the community.
If the goal to alleviate the problem is realized.
At any given time, more than 2.1 million individuals are
detained in American prisons and jails, and the vast majority of
them are released back into their communities after they have
been proven innocent or have served a sentence for their
criminal action. More than 10 million inmates, including those
released from state and federal prisons and those freed from
local jails, are released back into the community. Therefore
changes to re-entry programs are essential to ensure that all ex-
offenders are able to reintegrate into society in a friendly
environment. Reforming re-entry programs will become a
cornerstone of constructing safe and productive communities by
assisting people who have been imprisoned in making a
seamless transition back into their communities once they have
been freed.
The main obstacles that prohibit ex-offenders from effectively
reentering society have been recognized through years of
research. The reintegration process has been recommended to
begin on the first day of imprisonment. In prison, correctional
officers and facility programs should attempt to help the
offender develop a pro-social worldview and strong community
links and overcome any substance abuse or mental health
disorders that may be present. If a person returns to society,
their prospects of being a productive member of society are
decided by their capacity to discover a meaningful job, find a
place to live and get the education and skills necessary to
progress in their lives. A successful re-entry program aids
persons in overcoming one or more of these obstacles while
simultaneously cooperating with other community resources to
improve the quality of its services and programs. Through

changes in the re-entry programs, former offenders will have
the opportunity to support themselves and their families by
working in legitimate businesses.
Policy Review
The chosen policy is PUBLIC LAW 110–199—APRIL 9, 2008.
This policy aims to break criminal recidivism to promote public
safety. The policy is a state statute, and one strength associated
with the policy is that it helps rehabilitate ties between
offenders and their families after being released. The policy
addresses the mentioned social problem since it is intended to
positively impact the life outcomes of persons returning to
society after being incarcerated (Berghuis, 2018). According to
the policy, funding may be allocated to state and locally
recognized local governments to support policies and programs
intended to reduce recidivism and provide possibilities for those
who have been released from juvenile detention centers and
prisons.
The policy is divided into four sections: Section A
“improvements to current programs," Section B "improvement
of offender reintegration services," Section C "prosecution drug
treatment alternative to prison program," and Section D,
"prosecution drug treatment alternative to prison program." The
policy has been in place for 13 years since it was signed into
law in 2008. Many stakeholders strongly support and advocate
the policy, including state organizations, civil rights agencies,
non-profit organizations, and religious groups. Since its
implementation in 2008, no changes have been made to the
policy.
The mental health of ex-offenders who have been exposed to
prison abuse and neglect is generally compromised, and many
resorts to substance abuse and drinking to deal with their
trauma. As a social worker treating an ex-offender with various
traumatic experiences, I would use a trauma-informed approach
in my work. By using a trauma-informed lens to approach the
problem, I would better understand the client's behavioral and
cognitive functioning. As a social worker, I should strive for

change since I am safeguarding the rights and liberties of the
people, especially for those who have become vulnerable and
are suffering in various life circumstances. As long as we abide
by the National Association of Social Workers' Code of Ethics.
All social workers must provide advocacy and social justice for
those who cannot do it by themselves.
References
Berghuis, M. (2018). Re-entry programs for adult male offender
recidivism and reintegration: A systematic review and meta-
analysis. International journal of offender therapy and
comparative criminology, 62(14), 4655-4676.
Bhandari, C. (2019). Social dialogue: A tool of social
reintegration and post-conflict peacebuilding in Nepal. Asian
Journal of Peacebuilding, 7.
Petrich, D. M., Cullen, F. T., Lee, H., & Burton, A. L. (2022).
Prisoner Re-entry Programs. In Handbook of Issues in Criminal
Justice Reform in the United States (pp. 335-363). Springer,
Cham.
Weber, S. (2021). From gender-blind to gender-transformative
reintegration: women’s experiences with social reintegration in
Guatemala. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 23(3),
396-417.
Week 10: Social Change Project
Throughout the course, you have taken specific, actionable
steps for social change. The work you have done, when
collected and viewed as a single artifact, is your Social Change
Project.

Consider the major milestones you already completed for your
Social Change Project. How has your work, as well as the
feedback you received from your colleagues and Instructor, in
the following areas helped to inform you evolving approach to
advocacy and policy analysis?
· Week 2: Final Project Milestone 1: Identification of a Social
Problem
· Week 4: Final Project Milestone 2: Issue Statement and
Identification of a Policy
· Week 6: Final Project Milestone 3: Social Advocacy Proposal
· Week 8: Final Project Milestone 4: Policy Alternative
Additionally, you reviewed seminal and emerging literature for
advocacy strategies that can guide your actions and ultimately
help you convert your goals for change into policy that drives
change. You also practiced your advocacy in the form of oral
and written communications—skills that will help you navigate
different power dynamics, build critical relationships, and
influence decision makers to support your advocacy efforts.
How has this work helped to shape your advocacy skills and
prepare you for interactions with decision makers?
Reflecting on your work—your ongoing practice as a social
work professional—often leads to enhanced patterns in your
practice. This week, you submit a report on your comprehensive
Social Change Project. This is an opportunity to reflect on your
work over the term, including the conclusions you reached
regarding the connections between social work practice and
advocacy, and consider how you can continue to develop your
advocacy skillset to make social change a reality in your
communities.
Learning Objectives
Students will:
· Analyze the relationship between social work practice and
advocacy
· Analyze important takeaways through each stage of the social
change project
· Identify opportunities for improvement in policy

implementation practices
· Propose next steps for advocacy as a social worker
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Jansson, B. S. (2018). Becoming an effective policy advocate:
From policy practice to social justice (8th ed.). Cengage
Learning.
· Chapter 13, “Troubleshooting the Implementation of Policies
in Task 7” (pp. 460–487)
For your Assignment this week, you will submit your Final
Project—the culmination of the Social Change Project you have
been actively working on throughout this course. You will
review your past Final Project Milestone Assignments, reflect
on your experiences and
Assignment: Social Change Project: Final Project Report
Over the past several weeks, you have analyzed a policy related
to a social problem and have advocated for change. For this
Assignment, you submit your final report and present on your
experience and the outcomes of your Social Change Project.
To Prepare:
· Read Chapter 13 of the Jansson text.
· Review the feedback you received on the following
Assignments:
· Final Project Milestone 1: Identification of a Social Problem
(Week 2)
· Final Project Milestone 2: Issue Statement and Identification
of a Policy (Week 4)
· Final Project Milestone 3: Social Advocacy Proposal (Week
6)
· Final Project Milestone 4: Policy Alternative (Week 8)
· Select at least five scholarly sources to support your final
report. The sources can be from the Learning Resources

throughout the course or from your own independent literature
searches.
By Day 7
Submit a 2- to 3-page final report of your Social Change
Project. The final report should include the following:
· Provide a brief synopsis of the social problem and policy you
identified.
· Describe the steps of your project:
· How did your experiences as a social work professional and
your own goals for advocacy inform your selection of a social
problem?
· How did your knowledge of, or prior experiences with, the
social problem inform your policy analyses?
· What did you learn through each step, including your selection
of a social problem, identification of a policy, proposal for
advocacy, and recommendation for a policy alternative?
· Reflecting on your experience, identify 2–3 opportunities for
growth. What would you do differently based on
your recent learnings?
· For example, you might select a different policy alternative
that would be better received by elected officials (or other
decision makers in a position of power). Or you might use
different strategies when speaking in front of a group to
advocate for change.
· Explain how policy relates to direct practice.
· Describe how you will apply advocacy skills as a social
worker.
· Be sure to incorporate at least five scholarly articles you
found using standard APA format.
To read Chapter 13:
https://online.vitalsource.com/#/user/signin?userCheckReturnTo
=/reader/books/9781337514330/pageid/67
username: [email protected]

password: Landon2019!
1
2
Social Advocacy Proposal
Erika Tallent
SOCW 6361
Synopsis of the social problem
Men and women who have been released from prisons find it
difficult to reintegrate back into their communities because they
lack enough preparation, assistance, and resources. A felony
conviction on one's criminal record usually hinders employment
opportunities, public housing aid, and access to social
programs. Re-entry into the workforce is a major problem for
persons who have served time in prison. Employers are wary of
hiring people with criminal records, so formerly incarcerated
persons have difficulty finding and keeping work after they are
released (Poledna, 2021). Communities, families, and people are
affected by re-incarceration and failed re-entry. The most
vulnerable populations to this social problem are ex-offenders

and those who have recently been released from prison.
Synopsis of the policy
The chosen policy is PUBLIC LAW 110–199—APRIL 9, 2008.
This policy aims to break criminal recidivism to promote public
safety. The policy is a state statute, and one of its benefits is
that it aids in the rehabilitation of connections between
offenders and their families once they have been released.
Because it is designed to positively impact the life outcomes of
those who return to society after being incarcerated, the policy
addresses the aforementioned social problem (Holden, 2018).
According to the policy, funding may be allocated to state and
locally recognized local governments to support policies and
programs intended to reduce recidivism and provide
possibilities for those who have been released from juvenile
detention centers and prisons.
Reason for selecting the policy
As a policy advocate, I chose P.L. 110-199 as a strategy for
promoting social reintegration changes. Samuel Brownback and
Robert Portman were the bill's original sponsors, and it was
signed into law on APRIL 9, 2008. One of the main reasons for
choosing this approach is that changing the bill to enable
effective re-entry of ex-convicts into society reduces the
likelihood of returning to prison and eliminates the need to rely
on relatives for necessities. Furthermore, re-entry into the
workforce is a huge problem for people who have served time in
prison. Employers are hesitant to hire persons with criminal
backgrounds, making it difficult for previously incarcerated
people to find and keep jobs once they are released from prison
(Liberman, Hussemann & McKeever, 2021). Since many
offenders lack formal schooling or job experience, finding
profitable employment can be difficult. Aside from that, the fact
that this policy addresses a long-standing issue of social
reintegration that has plagued society throughout history is
another reason to choose this policy.
People who enacted the policy
The bill was initially proposed by Samuel Brownback and

Robert Portman and later signed into law on APRIL 9, 2008.
The statute reauthorized the establishment of a grant program
for the reintegration of adult and juvenile ex-offenders into
society. It also calls for improvements in reentry planning and
implementation. It directs the Attorney General to develop a
Juvenile Offender Reentry Resource Center to collect data and
assist grantees in implementing reentry programs.
Ways the policy impacts populations.
One of the major impacts of this policy on populations includes
its ability to facilitate increased flexibility during the re-entry
of youths and adults who have served their time in prisons.
According to recent polls, the P.L. 110-199 policy has reduced
recidivism among males in many states three years after its
introduction, making it a promising legislation for reducing
criminal recidivism. Since its inception, the policy has
consistently provided re-entry services such as housing and
employment assistance, substance abuse treatment, and victim
support, all of which are critical for persons being released from
prison (Doherty, 2018). Although the strategy has made
significant progress in guaranteeing the smooth reintegration of
ex-offenders, it has seen little development in states such as
Missouri, Alabama, and Virginia.
After being released from prison, offenders are pushed into a
new environment that is very different from their previous one,
and many struggle to adapt. Aside from that, ex-offenders who
have spent significant time in prison are released into an
environment that is radically different from their previous
surroundings due to the dynamic and constantly changing
environment. When most of them fail to have a support system,
they often fall into depression, anxiety, and stress, and some
often find themselves engaging in criminal activities. Therefore,
from a clinical setting, necessary changes must be made to the
policy to reduce the likelihood of ex-prisoners falling into
depression or getting re-arrested again.
Plan for social change
To reform this policy and improve the rights of ex-convicts, it

is critical to strive toward decreasing discrimination and stigma
through normalization. People need to understand that ex-
offenders are people like them and that they have reformed and
are ready to be integrated back into the community. By lobbying
for this policy, the issue of social reintegration will be
normalized, and awareness raised through local programs and
activities will go a long way toward ensuring that the
community aids in the smooth reintegration of ex-offenders.
Acquiring assistance from stakeholders while incorporating
social media to competitively work towards normalized social
reintegration will be critical.
References
Doherty, M. (2018). Public law. Routledge.
Holden, M. V. (2018). The Second Chance: A Movement to
Ensure the American Dream. UMKC L. Rev., 87, 61.
Liberman, A., Hussemann, J., & McKeever, B. (2021). Juvenile
Second Chance Act Participation in Virginia: Impact on
Rearrest, Reconviction, and Reincarceration. Journal of
Offender Rehabilitation, 60(3), 196-214.
Poledna, S. (2021). SOLUTION-FOCUSED APPROACH IN
PREPARING INMATES FOR SOCIAL

REINTEGRATION. Analele Ştiinţifice ale Universităţii»
Alexandru Ioan Cuza «din Iaşi. Sociologie şi Asistenţă
Socială, 14(1), 63-70.
1
6
Identification of a Social Problem
Erika Tallent
SOCW 6361
Walden University
Date: 3/13/22
Describe a current social problem and the vulnerable population
it impacts.
Social Reintegration is one of the biggest social probl ems in the
United States. More than 500,000 individuals are freed from
prison every year, with three-quarters of those released being
apprehended again within five years of their release. Men and

women who have been released from correctional facilities fi nd
it difficult to reintegrate into their communities because they
lack enough preparation, assistance, and resources. Employment
chances, public housing assistance, and access to social services
are all affected by a felony conviction on one's criminal record.
For those who have served time in jail, re-entry into the
workforce is a significant concern. Employers are wary of
hiring people with criminal backgrounds, and as a result, freed
convicts have a difficult time obtaining and maintaining
employment after being released (Obatusin & Ritter-Williams,
2019). Having even a minor criminal record creates major
barriers to employment and has far-reaching consequences. Re-
incarceration and unsuccessful re-entry have a devastating
impact on communities, families, and individuals. Ex-offenders
and those recently released from prison are the most vulnerable
populations to this social problem. People from minority
groups, notably young black men and those with limited
educational opportunities, have been disproportionately harmed
by this social problem.
How/when has this problem been identified historically, and
what were the actions taken to address this concern?
When a person is released from prison, it is generally a very
joyous day in their lives for them. It may be thrilling to be
reunited with loved ones and the rest of the free world. To
expect that the reintegration process into society would be
painless, on the other hand, would be a mistake. Former
criminals face several difficulties as they strive to rebuild their
life. This is particularly true for those who have served a long
prison sentence and are on parole. Since the construction of the
first jail in the 1770s, the challenges of prisoner re-entry into
society have been a long-standing source of concern in the
community. Throughout the twentieth century, however, the
issue of discrimination against ex-offenders gained momentum
in the public discourse.
To address this issue, the United States government has

developed a variety of interventions that take place after an
arrest to divert offenders away from the criminal justice system
and onto a more appropriate measure, such as restorative justice
or appropriate therapy, if necessary. After incarcerating
criminals, community-based sanctions are used to assist ex-
criminals in reintegrating into society rather than subjecting
them to imprisonment's marginalizing and harmful effects.
Individuals who have been sentenced to prison may use
correctional programs in jail and aftercare services following
their release. These programs are designed to assist jailed
individuals in their efforts to reintegrate into society and lead
law-abiding lives. In recent years, more emphasis has been
placed on developing comprehensive interventions to provide
frequent assistance to offenders both inside and outside of
prison.
How have the populations affected by the social
problem changed over time?
Ex-offenders who have challenges integrating back into society
often find themselves reoffending. Since the 1980s, this issue
has been more frequent, especially among male ex-offenders.
According to the National Institute of Justice, over 43 percent
of people recently released return to prison within a year of
their release date. The majority of the 500,000 offenders freed
in 35 states in 2020 were caught for a new crime within three
years of their parole, followed by 78 percent within six years
and 82 percent within nine years (Oliveira & Graca, 2021). An
extensive number of other factors have a role in recidivism,
including the individual's circumstances before imprisonment,
events during their incarceration, and the period after their
release from prison. Because it is difficult for them to
reintegrate into 'regular' society, one of the biggest reasons they
wind up back in jail is because they cannot find work. Many
offenders fear their upcoming release because they believe that
their lives will be different "this time," which does not always
materialize.

How might this social problem be incongruent with social work
values/ethics?
Re-entry into society after a traumatic event, rehabilitation, or
jail may be challenging for the individual and their family
members to navigate. Most of the time, there are several hurdles
in the path of these individuals being mentally healthy,
physically clean, and law-abiding citizens. So many social
workers are trained to help persons who are reentering society,
as well as their relatives and friends who are trying to aid them.
Social workers play a critical role in re-entry programs in the
United States and throughout the globe, particularly in prisons.
Social workers' responsibilities include, among other things,
ensuring the well-being of vulnerable ex-offenders and
providing support for their families (Nixon, 2020). Many social
worker degrees are offered with various specialties, including
jail social work at certain institutions. The goal of these
programs is to address the unique difficulties that people who
are jailed experience while also making certain that these
persons are treated with dignity and worth in the same manner
that everyone else is. Individual counseling, treatment
assessments for appropriate programs, and group programs are
all carried out by social workers to strengthen and support ex-
offenders who have been released from prison.
· Describe the next steps for how you will identify a policy.
The stages of establishing a policy included identifying the
problem, creating evaluation criteria, producing alternative
policies, analyzing other policies, and finally picking one
chosen policy. The chosen policy is PUBLIC LAW 110–199—
APRIL 9, 2008. This policy aims to break criminal recidivism to
promote public safety (Davis, 2018). One strength of this policy
is that it helps rehabilitate ties between offenders and their
families after being released. The limitation of this policy to
solving the identified social issue is that it does not encourage
the development and promotion of evidence-based measures that
increase public safety and reduce recidivism. It is necessary to

revise this policy, particularly how ex-offenders are prepared to
reintegrate into society. To provide continuous assistance to
criminals both inside and outside of prison, greater emphasis
should be placed on developing complete therapies that are
based on a continuity of care. Before being released from
prison, offenders should begin preparing for reintegration into
society. Interventions should be designed to enable their speedy
transfer from prison to community, reinforce the changes
achieved during in-prison treatment, and continue until they
have successfully reintegrated into their communities.
References
Davis, C. (2018). The Iconic Impact of Substance Use and High
Recidivism in the Criminal Justice System: An Exploration of
Interventions Within America's Most Costly"
Solution
".
Nixon, S. (2020). ‘Giving back and getting on with my life’:
Peer mentoring, desistance and recovery of ex-
offenders. Probation Journal, 67(1), 47-64.
Obatusin, O., & Ritter-Williams, D. (2019). A
phenomenological study of employer perspectives on hiring ex-
offenders. Cogent Social Sciences, 5(1), 1571730.
Oliveira, L., & Graca, D. (Eds.). (2018). Infocommunication

skills as a rehabilitation and social reintegration tool for
inmates. IGI Global.
1
6
Final Project Milestone 4-Policy Alternative
Erika Tallent
SOCW 6361
Walden University

Social Problem
One of the biggest social problems in the United States is social
reintegration. More than 500,000 individuals are freed from
prison every year, with three-quarters of those released being
apprehended again within five years of their release. Lack of
enough preparation, guidance, and resources after being
released forces them back to crime. A felony conviction on
one's criminal record usually hinders employment opportuni ties,
public housing aid, and access to social programs. Re-entry into
the employment world is a major problem for ex-offenders since
public members view them as potential threats to their business
(Zhang & Qiu, 2018). Having a small criminal record puts you
at a significant disadvantage in the job market and has far -
reaching effects. Re-incarceration and unsuccessful re-entry
have a devastating impact on communities, families, and
individuals. The most susceptible demographics to this social
issue are ex-offenders and those who have just been released
from jail.
What is the policy alternative?
For years, the PUBLIC LAW 110–199—APRIL 9, 2008 has

sought to reduce criminal recidivism by rehabilitating convicts
and reuniting them with their families after their release.
Because it is designed to positively impact the life outcomes of
those who return to society after being incarcerated, the policy
has been somehow effective in solving the problem of social
reintegration. Since not all policy changes can be accepted,
policymakers must have a backup plan if the initial policy fails.
In this case, the suggested policy alternative is the Corrections
and Recidivism Reduction Act of 2016 (CRRA). Through this
policy, the DOJ is required to: (a) come up with programs for
recidivism reduction; (b) create a prisoner needs and risk
evaluation system; and (c) carry out research on recidivism
reduction programs and needs assessment tools (Butts &
Schiraldi, 2018). This Act also mandates that community
correctional organizations enhance policies and procedures for
crime victims, educate personnel on evidence-based approaches,
and set aside a part of the funding for the program evaluation
study.
What changes (s) in the policy alternative are necessary, and
where will they need to occur (local or state)?
Since CRRA is federally mandated and funded, changes must
begin at the national level and work their way down to the state
level. The federal government should consider how stronger
reintegration programs and incentives for ex-offenders in the
community will benefit individuals and the whole community.

Is this policy alternative congruent with social work values?
Explain.
The suggested policy alternative is in line with the ideals of
social work. As social workers, our main goal is to improve
human well-being and help those in need. The CRRA is
connected with social work values since it focuses on
supporting ex-offenders in reintegrating seamlessly back into
society. Men and women who have been released from
correctional institutions sometimes struggle to reintegrate into
their communities due to inadequate preparation, guidance, and
resources (Stern et al., 2022). Fortunately, ex-offenders can
now obtain the help they need to reintegrate back into society.
Making financial resources available and accessible to all ex-
offenders will help individuals that are currently denied
employment opportunities.
What is the feasibility of the alternative policy (political,
economic, and administrative)?
The Corrections and Recidivism Reduction Act of 2016 is
feasible politically, economically, and administratively because
it is based on changing the way money is spent on recidivism
and controlling crime. Crime has a huge impact on Americans'
well-being and tax-funded resources. These expenditures are
exacerbated by a cycle of criminality leading to more than 50%
re-arrest rates for freed American convicts. Prison reforms that
are rigorous and evidence-based, such as the CRRA, will help

break the crime cycle, decrease future crime, and save
imprisonment costs by permitting more effective re-entry into
the workforce after release (Hatfield, 2021). We reviewed the
evidence on the underlying factors that determine the value of
such prison policy. We discovered significant variation in
effectiveness across federal and state programs, suggesting that
reallocating budgets from low-performing to high-performing
programs could reduce spending while also improving results.
We also find evidence that this policy can reduce crime and
save money in the long term by cutting jail expenses. Cost-
effective policies save at least one dollar in crime and jail
expenses for every dollar invested.
Does the policy alternative meet the policy goals (e.g., social
equality, redistribution of resources, social work values, and
ethics)?
This policy alternative meets the policy goals of redistribution
of resources, social equality, and social work policies by
increasing the efficiency and efficacy of the Federal prison
system.
What are the forces that are for the policy? What are the forces
that are against the policy?
Not all decisions we make please everyone; there will always be
those who disagree and others who will gather behind us to
support us. I would say the forces for this policy are those
individuals being released from prison and other humanitarian

organizations. Given that this policy promotes ex-prisoners easy
reintegration back into society, I don't believe there is any force
that opposes it.
How can policy advocacy skills be used to support the policy
alternative?
One of the best policy advocacy skills that can be used to
support this policy alternative is building expertise. Developing
competence in policy advocacy is critical to a problem's
effective resolution. The best approach to acquiring these skills
is to educate oneself on the many facets of certain problems and
the most appropriate style of advocacy necessary. To provide
light on the different methods in which related issues have been
resolved in the past, a thorough study regarding any similar or
related problems that have happened in the past must be
conducted (Guillemet, 2019). Developing the right attitude is
another crucial advocacy skill that can be utilized to promote
this policy alternative. Having the appropriate attitude is a key
policy advocacy skill that greatly influences one's efficiency
and success.
How does the policy alternative affect clinical social work
practice with clients?
The present policy impacts social workers' clinical practice with
clients because state and municipal governments set the tone for
how much money will be distributed, which translates into
giving help to families on a local, statewide, and even

worldwide level.
What changes could be made in the policy to support the needs
of clients seeking clinical services?
Based on the NASW Code of Ethics, we have an obligation to
our clients, and our main job is to support their well-being. In
general, our work prioritizes the needs of our customers, and we
must fight for their rights. Social work ideals, such as justice
for the economically and socially underprivileged, are
expressed in numerous ways. Advocacy is emphasized as a key
principle in social work school. This obligation is emphasized
in the Code of Ethics. Even if there are substantial reservations
about advocacy's efficiency, social workers will find it difficult
to withdraw from it since it is embedded in the professional
culture. The changes that can be made to the policy to support
clients seeking clinical support are to be more open-minded
around the issue and acknowledge the need for more
transparency in the implementation process.

References
Butts, J. A., & Schiraldi, V. N. (2018). Recidivism
Reconsidered: Preserving the community justice mission of
community corrections.
Guillemet, K. B. (2019). Rehabilitation and Restoration:
Effective Correctional Approaches for Recidivism Reduction
and Their Application in Los Angeles County. UCLA Criminal
Justice Law Review, 3(1).
Hatfield, M. A. (2021). The Potential of Community Corrections
to Reduce Mass Incarceration in the USA. In Global
Perspectives on Reforming the Criminal Justice System (pp.
145-161). IGI Global.
Stern, J. E., McBride, M. K., Carroll, M., Baker, A., & Savoia,
E. (2022). Practices and Needs in Reintegration Programs for
Violent Extremist Offenders in the United States: The Probation
Officer Perspective.
Zhang, S. X., & Qiu, G. (2018). Psychosocial interventions for
substance-abusing criminal offenders: borrowing US experience
for the Chinese context. European Journal on Criminal Policy

16Policy ReviewErika TallentSOCW 636

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 16Policy ReviewErika TallentSOCW 636

Similar to 16Policy ReviewErika TallentSOCW 636 (18)

More from EttaBenton28

More from EttaBenton28 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

16Policy ReviewErika TallentSOCW 636