Exploring the Criminal Element of Homelessness

FACTORS OF HOMELESSNESS 1
Factors of Homelessness: An Annotated Bibliography Dedicated
to the
Exploration of the Social Problem and Criminal Element
STUDENT NAME
Portland State University

Introduction:
The intent of this bibliography was to explore the nature of
homelessness with specific
attention to the population that has been involved with the
criminal justice system. In the
City of Portland this population can be readily seen as they

frequent the University
campus, and sleep unsheltered nearby. This topic became of
interest to research because
of the visibility here on campus and the desire to change this
behavior and lifestyle that
affects a small proportion of society. Wishing to achieve the
greatest synthesis of the
criminal problem associated with homelessness, the research
chosen for study provided
insight to the causes and factors of recidivism, and quantitative
data from interviews and
surveys. This combination of research was chosen because it
examined the reasons this
population enters and sometimes reenters the criminal system,
as well as establishing
perspective. This scope does not account for crimes committed
by the homeless, even
though it was a recurring topic in related research of the studies
themselves. The research
question for this synthesis is what is the criminal problem
associated with homelessness
and what factors have been found that influences this behavior?
This synthesis of research developed insight into the

aggravating factors of homelessness
in states such as Minnesota, Arizona, Nevada, and also overseas
in Milan, Italy. The
Recurring trends in the research suggest that though there is a
small proportion of the
population that is actively involved with the court and legal
systems, homelessness
provides for an overwhelming factor to recidivism. The
community or condition that an
offender released to played a significant role on their desistance
in criminal activity.
Further mediated through substance use and victimization,
homelessness adds a
significant strain on those that experience it. The type of social
interactions with other
homeless was also tested for effect on the topic, and it was
found that interactions with
previous offenders also show signs of correlation. Because of
the survivability aspect of
the lifestyle, and the frequent inability to secure food or shelter,
this population
commonly is charged or arrested with crimes such as
trespassing or other property crimes
because of their situation. Further analysis to the kind of

crimes committed could further
detail the specific homeless problem for the city or places
studied, but would probably be
different because this may be impacted by the resources for the
population of the
concerned location.
Annotations:
Clark V.A. (2014). Predicting two types of recidivism among
newly released prisoners:
First addresses as “launch pads” for recidivism or reentry
success. Crime &

Delinquency, 1-36. doi: 10.1177/0011128714555758
By evaluating the impact of multiple factors of individuals
separating from Minnesota
state corrections in 2009, the author, Valerie A. Clark, sought to
explain relationships of
post release housing situations that offenders released to and
rates of recidivism. Clark
found that individual-level variables such as neighborhood and
housing characteristics of
the area the offender was set to release maintained a lasting
impact on recidivism.
Through a longitudinal study of offenders released to the state
of Minnesota, the author
evaluated the most successful and least successful “launch
pads” (Clark, 2014) for
offender reentry. Clark classified each primary address the
offender listed when
releasing to categories such as private residences, halfway
houses, emergency (homeless)
shelters, treatment facilities, and impoverished communities.
These same measures were
recorded 1 year after release as their whereabouts and status
was determined through use

of the Correctional Operations Management Systems (COMS).
The research found that a large portion of those releasing to
emergency shelters were
rearrested within the year recorded for the study, and offenders
releasing to transitional or
halfway houses had the largest proportion of offenders to fail
via a supervision
revocation. Of the total sample, 66% of the offenders
recidivated, with 34% of total
sample rearrested and 32% revoked from supervision.
Offenders released to emergency
shelters (temporary emergency shelters, including homeless
shelters and motels with stay
of less than 30 days) posted the highest percentage of rearrests
within the sample at 45%.
Relocation to transitional housing (state-funded or private
halfway houses with
supervision and monitoring) also recorded the highest
percentage of revocation, at 50%.
In all, the report concluded that offenders were 34% more likely
of arrest when
transitioning straight to emergency shelters compared to
offenders releasing to private

residences. The study also concluded in line with other
research that details newly
released offenders are more likely to experience supervision
revocation or prison
readmission when returning to poor and non-affluent
neighborhoods.
The strengths of the research were the utilization of various and
extensive contextual
factors of offenders releasing from Minnesota corrections to
accurately display relation to
recidivism. All releasing offenders were given a context by
applying their individual
Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) score that measured
risk of recidivism.
Individual-level variables categorized the releases situation into
five descriptive
definitions, one being emergency shelter. Neighborhood-level
variables, including
urbanization and “Neighborhood Disadvantage”, as well as the
Index of Concentrated
Extremes (ICE) were determined to accurately portray the living
conditions upon release.
These measures increased construct validity because it matched

the type of residency
noted by the releasing offender to risk assessment scores and
geo-locations matched to an
offender’s whereabouts.
Because recidivism is an increasingly difficult outcome to
measure due to only recording
failure through police intervention (National Institute of Justice,
2008), this result cannot
be seen as an absolute answer to the overall criminal problems
this population has.
Weaknesses of the research fell on selection criteria and
inclusiveness to Minnesota
release. This decreased the validity as it excluded a certain
amount of offenders. The
follow-up time capped at one-year, not recording cases of
recidivism occurring out of the
time frame, as well as only recording recidivism through law
enforcement records
deteriorates the validity because other offenses could of
happened outside the parameters

of the follow-up and state police records. All offenders
releasing to other states were also
eliminated, further distorting the raw data. Another weakness is
that though it attempted
to use all offenders releasing in the state, there was very few
offenders releasing to work
release and emergency shelters, 12% and 7%, further diluting
the findings’ reliability.
What is also common of recidivism studies is that there is no
cross-population
generalizability from this sample. Because programs and
resources for inmates
undergoing reentry is vastly different intra-state, these results
cannot be compared to that
of another state’s newly released population.
This article was found by searching the PSU library website.
The article was found under
the criminology & criminal justice database of articles, and
located under the
‘criminology full text’ resource provided by SAGE journals.
Corno, L. (2015). Homelessness and crime: Do your friends

matter? The Economic
Journal. Doi: 10.1111/ecoj.12316
With an array of research extensively covering recidivism, the
further discussion of the
effect of friendship and criminality is researched through the
analysis of three releasing
jurisdictions in Milan, Italy. The purpose of this study was to
determine if social
interactions of those classified as homeless show a causal
relationship with criminal
behavior to the type of friendship (interaction person has
criminal record). This was
determined by using instruments of 1) the proportion of rainy
days in the last year-spent
homeless 2) inmate release data for the particular city of release
and comparing this with
arrest information of the individual case. Corno asserts that the
homeless spend extended
periods of time with one another during the rain and develop
much of their behaviors
from those interactions. Survey data from the responses of 836
homeless individuals;
collected from service providers, university students, and

private citizens, were compared
with outcome criminality. The article sought to add to the
current literature examining the
impact of social interaction on behavior and criminality and
“provide evidence of the
influence of the size of one’s network on criminal behavior”
(Corno, 2015).
The research found a relationship to how many friends a
homeless person had with an
arrest in their past. The survey found that, on average, the
increase of one additional
friend (not specifically non-criminal) lead to a decrease of 12
percentage points of the
likelihood of incarceration during a spell of homelessness.
Respondents were asked ‘who
were their best friends?’ and ‘whether they were homeless?’
among other various
demographic questions to add to the extensive depth that the
research captured. More
individuals in their peer group seem to establish a “safety net”
(Corno) of social support,

where they could rely on someone to assist them or return
favors when needed –and
possibly avoid criminality. This was found by comparing time
in the rain spent and the
characteristics of friends (if had any) by non-imprisoned
homeless versus imprisoned
homeless.
The sheer depth the research established in the report gives
instantaneous face validity.
Graphical analysis as far as a ‘friendship network’ (Figure A2,
Corno) of all respondents
and their peer groups were presented along with a multitude of
characteristic data clearly
detailing the depth of the survey. Superseding the interview
phase for each of the three
locations was a count of all homeless to ensure a proper sample
was drawn. Another
finding on the type of peers one associates with showed that an
increase in the share of
criminal friends a homeless person has ultimately increases the
likelihood of
incarceration for a non-criminal, by a rate of 23 percentage
points per increase of one

standard deviation of criminal friends. An improved design to
the study would be to have
a similar number of individuals that were imprisoned to those
that were solely homeless.
Selection factors such as achieving respondents via availability
sampling ultimately
hindered the reliability of the sample findings. Though the
survey portion was conducted
in 12 hours, it can only be a reflection of the relative population
present in the three
municipalities of Milan and is inherent in selection bias. The
generalizability of findings
is weak, as this did not use any sort of random sampling.
This resource was found from the PSU library online database,
while searching keywords
“homelessness and criminality.”
Fischer, S.N., Shinn, M., Shrout, P., Tsemberis, S. (2008).
Homelessness, mental illness,
and criminal activity: Examining patterns over time. American
Journal of
Community Psychology. 42(3-4). pp. 251 – 265. doi:
10.1007/s10464-008-9210-

z
This study sought to determine the relationship between
committing crime and varying
levels of mental illness of homeless individuals. Fischer et al.
differentiated between
violent and non-violent crime in order to explore if conditions
of mental illness lead to a
certain type of crime. The longitudinal study consisted of the
recruitment of 218
homeless adults. They had to have spent 15 of the last 30 days
homeless, shown a period
of housing instability, and been diagnosed with an “Axis I
diagnosis of severe mental
illness, such as psychotic disorder (e.g., schizophrenia) or mood
disorder (e.g., major
depressive disorder)” (Fischer et al., 2008). The main
hypothesis was that the more
severe the mental disability of the individual, the higher
likelihood of aggressiveness, or
violent crime. Data was collected via interviews of recruited
subjects that encompassed a
4-year time span, with testing in 9-month intervals. The study
found that the likelihood

of committing a criminal act increased along with the time the
individual had spent
homeless, and increase in severity of mental illness. The initial
hypothesis were
supported but findings suggested a weaker connection between
sheltered homeless and
“subsistence-driven crimes (e.g., breaking into buildings to find
shelter)” (Fischer et al.).
The relative factors of violent crime were also different than
expected, as it was not
determined to produce a significant relationship.
Because the study recruited individuals that were made
available to them through
transitional programs, the generalizability of the findings is in
question. The researchers
utilized availability sampling by recruiting individuals
recommended by psychiatric care
providers and those that were available in homeless shelter that
met requirements. This
weakened the validity of findings.

This study was found through reading the previous research
section of the Fox et al.
(2016) study and located via the PSU library database.
Fox, A.M., Mulvey, P., Katz, C.M., Shafer, M.S. (2016)
Untangling the relationship
between mental health and homelessness among a sample of
arrestees. Crime and
Delinquency. 62(5). pp. 592 – 613. doi:
10.1177/0011128713511571
In analyzing demographical information of arrested individuals,
the homeless and
mentally ill populations have been found to provide
increasingly consistent results as
factors to involvement in the criminal justice apparatus. The
study performed by Fox et
al., seeks to further analyze qualitative data surrounding the
characteristics of jailed
individuals and provide structural equation modeling to test the
relationship to
homelessness and other factors. Fox based data from interviews
of 3,673 recently

arrested in the county of Maricopa, Arizona within three
different facilities, seeking to
represent the arrested in this setting. Adding to the extensive
research done regarding the
consequences of homelessness in the criminal justice system,
few studies have examined
homelessness and mental illness as separate factors in the
relation to incarceration. The
current study presented by Fox et al. “proposes a model for
understanding the
relationship between mental health, substance abuse problems,
victimization and
homelessness for criminally involved individuals.” (2016). The
research team
hypothesized that variables such as criminal justice
involvement, coupled with a display
of mental illness increases the risk of victimization; as well as
substance abuse, and
increases the likelihood of becoming homeless.
Homelessness was not found to be a large contributor to the
population of arrested
individuals included in the sample. Only 8% of the sample
stated that they were

homeless within the 30 days preceding their arrest. Larger
portions of the arrestee
population included those with health problems, drug
dependent, alcohol dependent and
involved of some sort of victimization, with 30%, 31.7%, 20.6%
and 21.0% respectfully.
The direct effect of mental illness with homelessness was found
to be very minute, and
more of the substantiating evidence suggested more of a
connection from mental illness
to victimization. The research showed that homelessness was
most commonly a result of
the variables measured and most commonly followed by at least
one.
This study is not representative of the homeless population.
Though the analyses
intended on measuring homelessness as a result of the variables
measured, it was not an
overwhelming relation. As the study noted, the data collected is
cross-sectional, and
provides limited insight to the causal effect established. The

utilization of structural
equation modeling was intended to offset this limitation, but the
researchers still
cautioned the interpretation of the findings. Representativeness
to the arrestee population
in Maricopa County was a strong point of the research, as the
method of systematic
sampling of arrested individuals was utilized. The findings are
likely generalizable to
other like jurisdictions for self-report data. The validity
however hinges on the accuracy
of every respondents answers, because the data was compiled
from interviews. Only
through urine analysis testing, provided by the researchers, was
actual substance abuse
measured for the respondents. All other factors were those
made on their own remission.
Because of the environmental restrictions of the incarceration,
and the self-reporting
procedures utilized, the validity is overall weak, but can be seen
an aggregate perspective
of how the respondents viewed themselves.
This study was found through utilization of the PSU library

database, and was found
using keyword of “homelessness and mental illness” in the
criminology full text resource.
Hunter, B.A., Lanza, A. S., Lawlor, M., Dyson, W., Gordon, D.
M., (2015). A strengths-
based approach to prisoner reentry: The fresh start prisoner
reentry program.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative
Criminology. pp. 1-
17. doi: 10.1177/0306624X15576501
Hunter et al. intended on proving the lasting and positive impact
that personalized
rehabilitation and reintegration programs possessed in the lives
of those set out to release
in a matter of months in the state of Connecticut to three
designated communities. This
research was designed to evaluate repeated support and
counseling by trained and
motivated personnel in the lives of those set to release, in an
effort to prepare the offender
for troubles outside of the prison walls and in their
socioeconomic climate. The authors

sought to demonstrate the effectiveness and far-reaching
potential of strength-based
approaches in increasing success of reintegration and
rehabilitation. The present study is
a qualitative assessment of the impact of these strength-based
approaches during both
pre- and post- release phases of the reentry process to
individual communities, and
further seeks to qualitatively analyze through implementation of
focus groups, the impact
that these programs possess over newly releasing offenders. To
highlight the best
qualities of strength-based approaches, the study shadowed the
new implementation of
the Fresh Start Program that was designed to increase success of
prisoner reentry through
repeated collaboration and training meetings. The program
collaborated with businesses,
the Connecticut Department of Corrections, and community
leadership to provide
repeated training on various topics of employment readiness,
workplace safety, correction
and supervision success, and one-on-one counseling.

The focus group responses during incarceration were at first
cautious of the new program.
Offenders wondered if this program would help them with the
overbearing process of
reintegration, because they had never received help through the
prison in any way. Many
offenders seemed optimistic of the new program, as the
attention to care and
respectfulness of program staff seemed to win them over
eventually. During the baseline
integration to the program, risk assessments were noted and the
individuals were matched
with appropriate resources designed for their specific need.
This seemed to prove
beneficial, as the offenders in the post-release focus groups
identified the increased
accountability of the program staff and support had increased
their successes in the
reintegration process.
Strengths of this research include the detailed analysis of

feedback given by offenders
traversing the reentry process from prison to community. The
qualitative feedback
provided valuable insight to the thoughts the offenders had of
the Fresh Start Program,
and proved to be effective judging by the feedback. Feedback
from the offenders of the
implementation of the program is useful when determining the
applicability to other
communities and correctional facilities, as it seemed
overwhelmingly positive amongst
those that participated. The absence of measurable variables in
the study proves to be the
weakest point of the research. Inherent of qualitative studies
and focus groups is the
inability to measure the outcome of the independent variable
(Fresh Start Program) and
though the responses of the focus groups seem positive, these
were the only responses
recorded in the post-release phase of the study. The validity of
the research hinges on
whether the responses that were recorded in post-release phase
were accurate of the rest
of the participants, and because this was not discussed; the

validity remains in question,
as this is solely an exploratory study on the impact of strength-
based approaches. The
reliability of the study is also very weak, as different results are
inherent for repeated
studies in different settings.
This article was found from the article on Homelessnes and
Reentry by Lutze et al. also
included in this bibliography, and was listed in the prior
research to the study.
Lutze, F.E., Rosky, J. W., Hamilton, Z.K. (2013).
Homelessness and reentry: A
multisite outcome evaluation of Washington State’s housing
program for high risk
offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 41. pp. 471 – 491.
doi:
10.1177/0093854813510164
Setting out to investigate the impact of different modes of
transitional assistance and
wraparound services for inmates releasing to certain counties of
Washington State, this

study showcased the Reentry Housing Pilot Program (RHPP).
Created by the 2007
Washington State Legislature, and with a goal of reducing
overall costs of the state from
prisoner reentry, the pilot program selected eligible participants
that were high risk and
need offenders with no viable housing option and agreed to
participate voluntarily.
RHPP, unlike other modes of transitional assistance, provided
secure housing for up to 1
year post-release, but like other programs demanded that
participants attended treatment
and seek active employment. The study consisted of a quasi-
experimental research
design that matched participants in the program to similar
offenders going through same
process without support of the RHPP (N = 416). The purpose of
the study was to
distinguish the different outcomes of successful reintegration of
coordinated wraparound
services [like the RHPP] and other more common transitional
housing, such as halfway

houses, measuring outcomes by recidivism (revocations, new
conviction, prison
readmission).
The findings of the study were in line with the hypotheses that
participation in the RHPP
would reduce recidivism and increase survival times for the
same categories. RHPP
participants were found to significantly outperform their
matched co-offenders amongst
outcomes of new convictions and prison readmissions, 21.6%
vs. 35.6% and 37.0% vs.
56.3% respectively. The RHPP participants were also found to
significantly abstain from
homelessness post-treatment, with 8.7% of participants
becoming homeless after
treatment compared to 15.4% of comparison group.
The research utilized previous studies to bolster its
effectiveness and shape its methods to
encompass the most needed study. Having a greater sample size
increased the statistical
representativeness of the reentry population and individual

characteristics, increasing
statistical power and validity. The strain caused by reentry
from prison was assessed by
increasing follow-up time to 3 years post-release, encompassing
the prolonged difficulty
in successfully reintegrating. Measuring periods of
homelessness over time also added to
a better-developed picture of the problems of offenders.
As stated by the author, selection bias could not have been
avoided due to ethical
considerations. Though randomization is the most effective
way to procure a
representative sample, offenders with the highest need for
housing were given access to
the program resources and housing –which impacts the
reliability. Because offender
motivation for successful completion amongst those
participating in RHPP can be greater
for those participating, it is not a reliable method in measuring
true or natural responses
to the program.
This article was found through resources provided by the PSU

online library, specifically
searching “homelessness and prison population” from the
criminology and criminal
justice databases.
OTHER WORKS CITED
National Institute of Justice. (2008). Measuring recidivism.
Retrieved from:
http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/pages/measuri
ng.aspx

http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/pages/measuri
ng.aspx
Clark (2014)

Corno (2015)
Fischer et al. (2008)
Fox et al. (2016)

Hunter et al. (2015)

Lutze, Rosky, Hamilton (2013)
Annotated Bibliography Assignment
CCJ 380
The purpose of this assignment is for each student to
demonstrate an understanding of the research skills covered by
the library instruction component of this class and to use your
new research methods skills to critically analyze scientific

writing. You must use the Portland State University library
resources to locate the majority of your sources.
You are tasked with completing an annotated bibliography of 6
sources, all of which relate to a topic of your choice. Sources
may include: books, scholarly articles, government documents,
and web produced reports (as long as they are scholarly), and
other peer-reviewed or rigorous scientific report. You will need
to include at least 3 peer-reviewed journal articles (this includes
law reviews). Feel free to use the bibliographies of other
articles as jumping off points for locating other scholarly
articles.
One of the main points of this assignment is for you to
demonstrate a grasp of APA (American Psychological
Association) format and that you understand the scope of the
material appropriate for scholarly research. Consult the
American Psychological Associations Guide to Formatting for
correct citation style. There is a quick guide to APA format on
the Library website or you can find the full text in the library.
Overview of the Role and Importance of Citing Material
References and citationsserve several purposes. Most
importantly, they give credit to whom it is warranted. In
addition, they acknowledge the value of others' work, create an
important record of the line of scholarly inquiry, and allow
readers to evaluate the accuracy of your conclusions and to
pursue the subject further by examining the original documents.
All work that is a source of the ideas presented—whether
quoted, paraphrased, or summarized—should be cited properly.
To summarize is to condense the original into a sentence or two
in your own words; to paraphrase is to follow the original
statement or passage more closely but still restate it in your
own words. In paraphrasing, do not use whole phrases, many of
the same words, or sentence structures similar to the original.

To quote a source is to extract a word, phrase, sentence, or
passage from the original and insert it into the text. Quoted
material should be enclosed within double quotation marks or,
if lengthy (longer than three typewritten lines), indented as a
block quote.
In general, it is better to summarize or paraphrase others' ideas
than to present a stream of quotations. Your paper will be easier
to read and will better convey your understanding of what you
have read. Use direct quotations when the original words are
particularly well chosen—clear, incisive, or powerful. A good
research proposal will have zero to just a few (2 or 3) direct
quotes, you should endeavor to have a few as possible.
Whenever possible the material should be resented in your own
words (properly cited of course).
If you use another writer's words or ideas without citing the
source, you have committed an act of plagiarism. Work is
plagiarized even if it is in your own words, but is not properly
cited; a good rule is that every paragraph in a proposal should
have at least one citation. Very few ideas, if any, will be
original.
Documentation of sources should be presented in two places:
(1) in the text, to identify and credit the source immediately
following its use; and (2) following the text, in a list of
references with more detailed information about each source.
Cite the source whose ideas and/or words you are using. If you
are citing work referenced or quoted by another author (and you
do not have access to or have not read the primary source), cite
the original author "in" the work where you found it; for
example, (Rossi in Singleton and Straits1999).
Annotated Bibliography Assignment Instructions
Part I: Introduction
Begin with an introduction explaining the scope of your topic to

familiarize the readers with the focus of your annotated
bibliography. The introduction should be one to two paragraphs
long, but does not need to be elaborate or include references.
Within the introductory statement, you should indicate the topic
of study, what research question your topic addresses, and why
this project interests you.
Part II: Annotations:
The annotations should be listed alphabetically by author, using
APA format. Each entry should conform to the following
structure by answering each of the three parts below:
1. A complete citation in APA format.
2. An annotation of the source. An annotation briefly describes
and evaluates the reference with the purpose of informing the
reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources
cited. The annotation of each source should address the
following items in the order presented below:
I. Summarize in a sentence or two the author’s main point.
II. The purpose of the work.
III. What were the author(s) main findings?
IV. The strengths of the research.
V. The weaknesses or biases of the material.
3. Short explanation of how the resource was located – e.g.
Academic Search Premier, Portland State University Online
Catalog, recommended by professor, etc.
Part III: Photocopies of Material:
You will be required to turn in a photocopy of the first page of
the journal article, government document, table of contents of a
book, first page of a webpage, or other item needed to clearly
identify the source. You do not need to turn in the entire
article, just the first page. Attach these to the end of the main
document.
TIPS
Don't confuse abstracts or summaries with annotations.

Abstracts are the purely descriptive summaries often found at
the beginning of scholarly journal articles or in periodical
indexes.
Annotations are descriptive and critical; they expose the
author's point of view, clarity and appropriateness of
expression, and authority.
Suggestions for Writing Annotations (To help you think about
the sources, not a “requirement”)
Content – What is the resource about? Is it relevant to your
research?
Purpose – What is it for? Why was the book or article written?
Usefulness – What does it do for your research?
Reliability – Is the information accurate? Do other sources
support the
conclusions?
Authority – Is it written by someone who has the expertise to
author the
information? What are the author’s credentials?
Currency – Is it new? Is it up-to-date for the topic?
Ease of use – Can a “real person” use this resource? What is
the reading level
of the resource?
What you need to turn in for the final assignment
1. Brief (1-2 paragraphs) introduction to your topic
2. Citations for all of your sources in correct APA format

(consult D2L)
3. Annotations with both description and critical evaluations of
each source
4. Photocopies as required from each item included in the
bibliography
3

Exploring the Criminal Element of Homelessness

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Exploring the Criminal Element of Homelessness

Similar to Exploring the Criminal Element of Homelessness (14)

More from mecklenburgstrelitzh

More from mecklenburgstrelitzh (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Exploring the Criminal Element of Homelessness