Program Profile: The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism (Minnesota)

Profile Updated: January 03, 2023

Summary: This program aims to reduce recidivism among Minnesota’s prison population by expanding the accessibility of visitation opportunities through the use of video calls for visitors from any location (using a computer equipped with a camera, microphone, and access to high-speed internet), overcoming barriers to in-person visits, and helping maintain personal connections. The program is rated Promising for reducing reconvictions for any offense and reconvictions for felony offenses. (Review the full program description).

Title Rating Details Outcome Category Study(ies)

Any reconviction (multisite)

Promising

The general reconviction rate was lower for treatment group individuals who received video visits (24.6 percent) compared with individuals in the comparison group who did not receive video visits (31.4 percent). The difference was statistically significant.

Crime/Delinquency; Multiple crime/offense types/recidivism ; Conviction/reconviction

Duwe, Grant, and Susan McNeeley. 2021. “Just as Good as the Real Thing? The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism.” Crime & Delinquency 67(4):475–97. See evaluation methods.

Felony reconviction (multisite)

Promising

The felony reconviction rate was lower for treatment group individuals who received video visits (15.3 percent) compared with individuals in the comparison group who did not receive video visits (19.3 percent). The difference was statistically significant.

Crime/Delinquency; Multiple crime/offense types/recidivism ; Felonies

Duwe, Grant, and Susan McNeeley. 2021. “Just as Good as the Real Thing? The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism.” Crime & Delinquency 67(4):475–97. See evaluation methods.

Program Goals/Program Theory

Social bond theory suggests that prison visitation may reduce reoffending by allowing individuals who are incarcerated to maintain personal connections with others in the community (Hirschi 1969). Barriers to in-person visitation can arise for many reasons, such as when potential visitors have to travel long distances, do not have reliable transportation, have difficulty traveling because of health or age, face issues related to obtaining childcare, or for cost-related reasons (Duwe and McNeeley 2021). Video visitation can be a solution to some of the obstacles posed by in-person visits. Similar to Minnesota’s in-person Prison Visitation Program, the primary goal of the prison video visitation initiative is to reduce recidivism of individuals who are incarcerated in Minnesota prisons. The video visitation initiative increases the accessibility of visitation opportunities because visitors do not have to travel to the prison.

Program Components

To participate in video visitation in Minnesota, visitors must be on the visiting list of the person who is incarcerated. To be placed on a visiting list, individuals must submit an application and undergo a background check. Video visits must be scheduled in advance by the visitor, using an account through the vendor that provides the video visits.

Visitors may participate in a video visit from any location with high-speed internet connection and a computer with a camera and microphone. The person who is incarcerated participates in the visit from a kiosk located in their living unit. To engage in a video visitation, the individual who is incarcerated must have an account with the vendor. The kiosk schedule and availability vary by facility and living unit. Each video visit can last up to 30 minutes.

Although there is a maximum number of in-person visiting hours allowed per month, the Minnesota Department of Correction’s policy does not restrict the number of video visits an individual can receive, and video visits do not count toward the maximum in-person visiting hours per month.

Study Title: Just as Good as the Real Thing? The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism (which is associated with Outcome 1 and Outcome 2)

Research Design

Duwe and McNeeley (2021) conducted a retrospective quasi-experimental design to assess the impact of video visitation on recidivism, using a sample of individuals released from Minnesota prisons from 2016 to 2018. Propensity score matching was used to individually match those who received video visits with individuals from the larger comparison group pool (approximately 19,983 individuals in prison).

Sample

Individuals in the treatment group (n = 885) received at least one video visit, while those in the matched comparison group (n = 885) did not receive any video visits. Individuals in the treatment group were on average 34 years old, and about half (48 percent) were white. Most participants in the treatment group were male (91 percent), unmarried (86 percent), and received in-person visits (79 percent). Similarly, individuals in the matched comparison group were on average 34 years old, and about half (49 percent) were white. Most participants were male (91 percent), unmarried (86 percent), and received in-person visits (80 percent). After matching, the two groups were also equal on several covariates such as criminal history and prison-based measures. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups after matching.

Data Collection

Data on video visits were obtained from JPay, the vendor that provided video visits to those incarcerated in Minnesota prisons. Recidivism data on convictions were obtained from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, and revocation data were obtained from the Correctional Operations Management System database maintained by the Minnesota Department of Corrections.

Outcome Measures

Recidivism measures included a reconviction for any offense and a reconviction for a felony offense. The follow-up time for recidivism ranged from 2 to 5 years, with an average of 3.5 years.

Statistical Analysis

Cox regression models were used to estimate the effects of video visits on recidivism, accounting for propensity score and in-person visitation. The study did not conduct subgroup analyses.

Citation: Duwe, Grant, and Susan McNeeley. 2021. “Just as Good as the Real Thing? The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism.” Crime & Delinquency 67(4):475–97.

Date Created: July 17, 2024

Rating Process

Learn how this and other practices are rated

Program Status

This program is Active.

Program Profile: The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism (Minnesota)

Program Goals/Program Theory

Program Components

Study Title: Just as Good as the Real Thing? The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism (which is associated with Outcome 1 and Outcome 2)

Research Design

Sample

Data Collection

Outcome Measures

Statistical Analysis

Rating Process

Program Status

Target Population

Setting

Program Types

Program Profile: The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism (Minnesota)

Program Description

Program Goals/Program Theory

Program Components

Evaluation Methods of Evidence Base

Study Title: Just as Good as the Real Thing? The Effects of Prison Video Visitation on Recidivism (which is associated with Outcome 1 and Outcome 2)

Research Design

Sample

Data Collection

Outcome Measures

Statistical Analysis

Additional Findings

Cost

Implementation Information

Additional References

Related Practices

Rating Process

Program Status

Program Details

Target Population

Setting

Program Types

Program Contacts