Transportation Barriers to Successful Reentry among Returning Citizens: A Qualitative Interpretive Meta-synthesis

Introduction

In 2017, 622,400 individuals returned to their communities from prison (returning citizens) in the United States (US) (Bronson & Carson, 2019). Recently, the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that 83% of those released from incarceration will be re-arrested within 9 years (Alper et al., 2018). This finding helps to explain the cycle that brings people through U.S. jails 10,000,000 times annually and accounts for a re-incarceration rate of 55% in 5 years after release (Sawyer & Wagner, 2019).

Unsuccessful reentry jeopardizes community safety, promotes re-incarceration, and increases costs to taxpayers to support the criminal justice apparatus. Research estimates that each recidivism event costs approximately $150,000, half of which is born by victims of crime, a third by tax-payers, and the remainder is indirect costs (State of Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council, 2018). At a national level, these costs account for 2.9% of the U.S. GDP, roughly $500 billion (Council of Economic Advisors, 2018).

There is research evidence that strong networks of support reduce recidivism, but most communities remain ill-equipped to successfully support returning citizens who face a patchwork of logistical hurdles. These include court-mandated obligations, scarce offender resources, and critical mental health and health services. In addition, available housing, employment, and access to transportation have been identified as major barriers to successful reentry (La Vigne et al., 2008; Morani et al., 2011).

Consistent with the U.S. Department of Transportation’s active engagement with “environmental justice,” a commitment to minority and low-income people to “a fast, safe, efficient, accessible, and convenient transportation system for communities nationwide” (USDOT, n.d.), returning citizens are highlighted here as a previously unconsidered environmental justice (EJ) population. While many EJ populations sustain mobility challenges and constraints, this particular group faces some of the most significant barriers.

This article uses Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis (QIMS) (Aguirre & Bolton, 2013, 2014) to synthesize published qualitative research on transportation issues faced by returning citizens. Therefore, the research question is: what are the transportation experiences of returning citizens?

Literature Review

At the end of 2016, 6,613,500 persons were under correctional supervision (U.S. Bureau of Statistics, 2018a) and of these, 4,537,100 were under probation or parole (U.S. Bureau of Statistics, 2018b). For some exiting the prison environment, successful reentry can be a daunting task. Kirkpatrick (2018) found that reentry occurs in three phases: establishing oneself outside of prison, building a life in the community, and sustaining that life. Many who return to the community face obstacles due to dependence on the institutional structure and the exploitive norms of prison culture which can lead to hypervigilance, interpersonal distrust, psychological distancing, diminished sense of self-worth, and post-traumatic stress reactions to experiences in prison (Haney, 2001). In addition to personal challenges, many returning citizens also experience structural barriers, most commonly related to obtaining employment and stable housing (Baillargeon et al., 2010; Brown & Bloom, 2009; Maschi & Koskinen, 2015; Raphael, 2011). Maschi and Koskinen (2015) found returning citizens often encounter social structural barriers—the inability to find employment, a lack of formal and informal support, and homelessness—as well as individual challenges—like substance abuse and distrust of authority figures—that can interfere with the establishment of life post prison. Furthermore, returning citizens can also have mental health issues from a current mental health diagnosis or trauma from previous life experiences, such as a violent relationship, or from time spent in prison (Rixey, 2017). Due to the many obstacles returning citizens may incur, as well as probation or parole requirements, transportation is often a vital resource to successful reentry.

Reentry and Transportation

Returning citizens rate the lack of transportation as one of the top 10 challenges of reentry (Morani et al., 2011; Ward & Merlo, 2016). In Walker’s (2014) study, 46.7% of women had access to cars, whereas 53.3% had to rely on public transportation. In addition, released individuals who had secured housing relied on social relationships for transportation, offering an alternative to public transportation, but problematic in ways both similar and dissimilar to public transportation. In contrast, those released without housing, and who may ultimately become homeless, depended exclusively on public transportation (Walker et al., 2014). Often, public transportation systems are not a reliable means for accessing parole or probation appointments (Ward & Merlo, 2016). Those residing in rural communities list transportation as the main barrier to maintaining parole or probation requirements (Zajac et al., 2014). Moreover, transportation is an important resource for service engagement (Begun et al., 2016) for those with mental health and substance abuse disorders who face challenges due to unreliable and inconsistent transportation (Sung et al., 2011). In a sample of 700,000, Sung, Maloney, and Mellow reported that 17.5% (69,000) did not obtain necessary substance abuse treatment because of a deficit in transportation resources. Given the critical role of transportation in successful reentry, understanding returning citizens’ transportation experiences can reveal important insights into transportation deficits and offer possible solutions to service providers, criminal justice professionals, and urban planners.

Review of QIMS Literature

Qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis (QIMS) is a method developed by social workers that synthesizes published qualitative data to achieve a deeper understanding of a phenomenon (Aguirre & Bolton, 2014).QIMS has been utilized to analyze a variety of experiences, including children’s exposure to intimate partner violence (Ravi & Casolaro, 2018), marginalized women’s postpartum depression (Maxwell et al., 2019), and the academic success of high school students (Rogers et al., 2018). QIMS has also been used to synthesize topics involving justice-involved populations. Terry et al. (2018) reviewed environmental influences on services and mental health for incarcerated populations. Sliva (2015) explored the lived experiences of life without parole, and Nordberg et al. (2016) explored minority youth encounters with police officers. However, QIMS has not been applied previously to the transportation experiences of returning citizens. Although QIMS is a recent addition to a suite of qualitative review methods, its use has expanded rapidly; and QIMS studies have been published in top-tier European and North American journals. This study’s QIMS will, therefore, fill the gap in literature by synthesizing qualitative studies that have focused on this topic.

Method

A qualitative research design is an important and common practice in social welfare research, while the synthesis of qualitative work is less common and underutilized (Aguirre & Bolton, 2013). Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis (QIMS) is a method that was developed to address this gap (Aguirre & Bolton, 2014). The QIMS design aims to create a “broader, in-depth, and more holistic understanding of phenomenon,” especially relevant to the foundational biopsychosocial tenets of human behavior and the ethics and values of social work (Aguirre & Bolton, 2014, p. 280). QIMS as applied here is a “good fit” as related to the social justice framework and the importance of extending this research methodology.

Instrumentation

In qualitative research, the researchers are the primary instruments of inquiry (Patton, 2002), including the QIMS methodology. In an effort to increase transparency and credibility of this research, the authors formed a research team with diverse perspectives by race, age, gender, and nationality to illuminate any potential biases and accommodate unique viewpoints on the topic.

Sampling

The sampling procedure for a QIMS is a purposive and theoretically-guided exhaustive review of qualitative studies (Aguirre & Bolton, 2013), which in this case included both peer-reviewed articles and grey literature, for example, dissertations. Based on an initial informal evaluation of the literature resulting in just a few relevant studies, a wide range of databases were used to conduct the formal search. The databases included Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Complete, Communication & Mass Media Complete, Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text, ERIC, Family Studies Abstracts, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, Legal Collection, Legal Information Reference Center, MasterFILE Complete, PsycARTICLES, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, PsycINFO, Race Relations Abstracts, Science & Technology Collection, Social Work Abstracts, Sustainability Reference Center, and TOPICsearch. Within these databases the following search terms were used: offenders, criminal*, prisoner*, felon*, convictions, inmates, returning citizens, reentry, barriers, obstacles, challenges, issues, transportation, and qualitative. Then, Google Scholar was searched applying the same search terms. Finally, forward citation searches were conducted on included studies.

Inclusion criteria for this investigation are studies that: (1) were published in peer-reviewed journals or were published dissertations or theses; (2) were published in English; (3) sampled people who had been incarcerated and were returning to US communities; (4) were dated after 2004; (5) included direct participant quotes related to transportation barriers; and (6) were conducted using qualitative methods, whether as the sole methodology or as part of a mixed methods design.

The searches, conducted between October and December 2018, yielded 80 unique articles for review after 18 duplicates were removed. With title and abstract screening, 19 articles were read in their entirety to evaluate the degree to which they met the inclusion criteria. Following the full text screening, 11 articles were identified and included in the QIMS. Additionally, to determine if any relevant articles were not captured by the searches, the references of the included articles were scanned to identify additional studies. See the quorum chart (Figure 1) for details of the sampling process and Table 1 for summary characteristics of each included study.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Quorum chart

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Characteristics of Studies Included in the QIMS.

Author(s) and publication year	Title	Qualitative data collection method	Age range, race, gender	Sample size	Recruitment site
Chavira et al. (2016)	From prison to the community: The ab109 experience in Los Angeles county	Interviews	28–56, African-American (n = 6), Latino (n = 3) and Caucasian (n = 1), male	10	Los Angeles County, California
Johnson (2014)	Economic impediments to women’s success on parole: “We need someone on our side”	Interviews	24–68, African-American (n = 47) and Caucasian (n = 13), female	60	Southern state
Johnson (2015)	Women parolees’ perceptions of parole experiences and parole officers	Interviews	24–68, African-American (n = 47) and Caucasian (n = 13), female	60	Southern state
Luther et al. (2011)	An exploration of community reentry needs and services for prisoners: A focus on care to limit return to high-risk behavior	Focus groups	Unreported, African-American (n = 35) and White (n = 16), male (n = 22) and female (n = 29)	51	Greater Indianapolis area, Indiana
Nhan et al. (2017)	The reentry labyrinth: The anatomy of a reentry services network	Focus group interviews	Unreported, unreported, male (n = 3) and female (n = 2)	5	Tarrant County, Texas
Northcutt Bohmert (2016)	The role of transportation disadvantage for women on community supervision	Interviews	Unreported, unreported, female	75	Michigan
O’Brien (2001)	“Just like baking a cake”: Women describe the necessary ingredients for successful reentry after incarceration	Interviews	20–67, African-American (n = 4), Latina (n = 2), Korean/African-American (n = 1), Native American (n = 1), and European American (n = 10), female	18	Two Midwestern states
Richie (2001)	Challenges incarcerated women face as they return to their communities: Findings from life history interviews	Interviews	Unreported, reflected national statistics of Non-White (n = 67%), White (n = 33%), female	42	Unreported
Sachs and Miller (2018)	Beyond responsivity: Client service engagement in a reentry demonstration program	Interviews	21–55, African-American (n = 16), White (n = 2), Hispanic (n = 1), male (n = 18) and female (n = 1)	19	Northeastern state
Walker et al. (2014)	Parole reentry and social capital: The centrality of homelessness	Interviews	Unreported, unreported, unreported	73	Metropolitan area in a western state
Whittemore (2008)	Logistical barriers faced by women on parole: A critical ethnography	Critical Ethnography including interviews, observation, and companioning of participants	Unreported, unreported, female	9 (interviews)	Stoddard County, Texas

Analysis

The third author extracted the quotes related to transportation from the original articles and uploaded them into cloud-based qualitative software, Dedoose. The following steps were repeated independently by the first, second, and third authors: Reading each quotation from the included studies line-by-line, and; Applying Dedoose to record initial thoughts and primary codes related to transportation. Then, during a series of weekly 1 hour meetings, the codes were iteratively grouped into thematic clusters, with authors’ debating these until consensus was achieved. The final overarching themes and subthemes and their relationship to the original themes extracted from the included studies are presented in Table 2.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

New Overarching Themes and Subthemes and Original Extracted Themes.

New themes and subthemes*	Extracted themes and subthemes*
Transportation connects complex obligations**	Transportation (Johnson, 2014).
	Transportation (Johnson, 2015).
	Barriers to successful reentry (Luther et al., 2011).
	Compounding intricacies to reentry (Nhan et al., 2017).
	The impact of competing demands (Richie, 2001).
	Logistical factors, scheduling difficulties, transportation (Sachs & Miller, 2018).
	Transportation (Walker et al., 2014).
	Inefficient scheduling of parole mandates, transportation (Whittemore, 2018).
Transportation inefficiency threatens meeting obligations	Transportation (Johnson, 2014).
	Transportation (Johnson, 2015).
	Compounding intricacies to reentry, transportation (Nhan et al., 2017).
	Inefficient scheduling of parole mandates, transportation (Whittemore, 2018).
Transportation costs too much	Transportation (Johnson, 2014).
	Transportation (Johnson, 2015).
	Transportation (Nhan et al., 2017).
	Individual-level problems helped by social support (Northcutt Bohmert, 2016).
	Transportation (Walker et al., 2014).
Transportation deficiencies exacerbate vulnerability	Individual-level problems helped by social support, Individual-level problems without social support, Poor neighborhoods, lack of family support, and substance abuse (Northcutt Bohmert, 2016).
	The impact of competing demands (Richie, 2001).
	Transportation (Whittemore, 2018).

*

N.B. Themes are bold, subthemes are not.

**

Some articles discussed the interwoven nature of obligations and transportation though not considered a theme by the original author (Northcutt Bohmert, 2016, for example).

Triangulation

Triangulation is a critical component of the QIMS process that is intended to reduce bias and increase trustworthiness (Aguirre & Bolton, 2013). This QIMS utilized triangulation in three distinct forms: sources, methods, and analysts. Triangulation of sources was accomplished by including 11 distinct studies ¹ (see Table 1 for demographics).Triangulation of methods was accomplished through the inclusion of studies that utilized a variety of methodologies, namely interviews, focus groups, and critical ethnography. Triangulation of analysts was accomplished though the authors’ collaboration of coding, theme creation, and authoring the results.

Findings

The 11 studies include 362 male and female participants. Of the reported ethnicities, 68% were African American, 27% were White, and the remainder identified as Latino/Hispanic, Native American, or Korean American.

Although lay knowledge readily cites transportation as a major barrier to successful reentry, we located just 11 articles for inclusion in this review and only one (Northcutt Bohmert, 2016) focused on logistics among returning citizens. Six were published recently (in the last 5 years). We included 11 articles and one dissertation, and almost all included studies collected data via interviews. Whittemore (2008) is an ethnographic investigation was included after consultation with one of the two methodological creators who agreed that ethnographic observations apply because of the participant aspect inherent in ethnographic methodology (Praetorius, personal communication). Two themes emerged from our analysis: Theme 1—Transportation connects complex obligations, highlighting the critical role that transportation plays in the successful navigation of post-release conditions; Theme 2—Transportation deficiencies exacerbate vulnerability, revealing how transportation factors intertwine with institutional and structural issues to expose returning citizens to precarious situations they must face to be successful.

Discussion

The purpose of this QIMS was to synthesize the reported experiences of returning citizens as related to reentry transportation challenges. What little research exists on this topic indicates that appropriate resources, research or otherwise, have not been dedicated to reducing or removing these barriers. During the last four decades, the U.S. incarcerated population increased 500%, with the current rate of incarceration at 639 per 100,000 (The Sentencing Project, 2020). While prior-offenders are held responsible for their crimes and successful reentry, communities have not been held accountable for supporting reentry. The correctional system in the state that this research was conducted provides citizens exiting prison $50 and a bus ticket to their home county. Both returning citizens from jails and prisons are expected to find housing, employment, meet probation or parole obligations, maintain stable mental health, and resist drug use.

The experiences outlined here make it clear that navigating these expectations with existing transportation systems can seriously jeopardize access to opportunities, not to mention actual reentry success. While transportation is consistently listed among the top needs for reentry, many studies situate housing and employment ahead of transportation (for examples see La Vigne et al., 2008; Nhan et al., 2017). However, as Bohmert (2016) points out, transportation is more important than work experience or education in locating and keeping employment (Lichtenwalter et al., 2006). Further, access to stronger housing markets for EJ populations, and cost, inefficiency, and availability, the primary findings here prohibiting transportation access, are creations of the community. As Nhan et al. (2017) explain, transportation is vital to connect the pieces of reentry but “is one of the least frequently provided services” (p. 17).

Safe, dependable transportation is of particular concern for women. Lack of community planning and thoughtful policy regarding transportation access exacerbates gendered vulnerability. In her study, Bohmert (2016) found justice-involved women were more likely to live in areas without nearby grocery stores, sidewalks, or frequent busses—areas she termed “car dependent.” Further, justice-involved women were more likely to live in high crime areas, particularly violent crime, making it unsafe to walk or take public transportation. In addition to issues of social structure, criminal-justice policies of releasing women in high crime areas in the middle of the night, for example, seem to communicate a disregard for their safety and well-being.

Transportation planners at the turn of the 20th century saw transportation facilities, “not as ends in themselves but as tools for providing access between cities and suburbs, work and home” (Bowman et al., 2009, p. 162). Transportation was viewed as multi-modal, simultaneously stressing the importance of a variety of ways to navigate space. As automobile traffic increased, the demand for highways, byways, and freeways did as well. The planning, though, was dictated by the needs of the wealthy and not the needs of all citizens (Bowman et al., 2009). Transportation investments tend to elevate road construction and major metro projects aimed at increasing vehicle efficiency instead of providing appropriate access to goods and services for EJ populations (Lucas, 2007). Public transportation has become the purview of the poor without consideration of the needs of those it “serves.”

Lucas (2007) recognizes public transportation as under-planned and under-resourced. Although the “poverty of transportation” for EJ populations has occupied a spot among federally protected civil rights, the right to transportation justice has taken a backseat to enforcing criminal justice. Recognizing transportation as a human right elevates safety for all citizens by increasing success for returning citizens and reducing likelihood of reoffending.

Because qualitative research related to transportation barriers facing returning citizens is relatively scant, few studies were available on which to base these findings. The study’s expansive selection method ensured that as many transportation-related inquiries were included as possible. From this review, it is evident that transportation barriers intertwine with other reentry obstacles and deserve increased research attention. Additionally, qualitative research is not generalizable. The units of analysis used here reflect the experiences of a fraction of the over100,000,000 experiences of community reentry every year in the United States.

To elevate the transportation rights for all citizens, cities should consider adding to and restructuring existing routes that ensure EJ populations may access the goods and services already available across many communities. However, restructuring may be cost prohibitive and time-extensive. Communities may consider supporting ride-share services as a timelier and less expensive alternative. Additionally, ride-share services can be implemented in rural areas where traditional public transportation resources are lacking.

The health of a community is, in part, tied to crime rates. Planning for meeting the needs of returning citizens should be considered a crime-reduction strategy. Locating employment opportunities, goods, services, and housing within existing transportation networks will increase the likelihood of successful reentry and reduce the cost of the over-utilized criminal justice system.