Home for sex offenders

If you think what you’re looking for should be here, please contact the site owner. Home for sex offenders Project of the Office of Justice Programs, U. The implementation by many public housing entities and homeless shelters of exclusionary rules that focus specifically on sex offenders limit the residency options available to this population.

Because some sex offenders are unable to develop suitable residency plans prior to release, they may be denied conditional release. As a result, they serve out their maximum sentences in facilities and are released to the community with no supervision or treatment of any kind. In these instances, criminal and juvenile justice practitioners are not able to provide critical assistance and support, or implement monitoring strategies that could reduce the likelihood of future victimization. In addition to these unique challenges for sex offenders, it is often the case that, at the time of release, they do not have the financial resources to secure affordable or suitable housing independently. Taken together, this suggests the need to provide sex offenders a more gradual and incremental community reintegration plan that utilizes a range of transitional options. The inability to find affordable and adequate housing is among the most significant barriers to effective reentry.

The utilization of a continuum of lower level placement options for sex offenders and other offenders within the correctional system requires that these agencies dedicate resources to enhancing the capacity of lower level facilities when possible. Because these types of exclusionary policies—which parallel those in the community—appear to be based on misinformation about sex offenders, an investment in specialized training is warranted. Intermediate transitional placement options afford sex offenders additional time and opportunities to begin to manage the housing and placement challenges associated with reentry, to develop viable and permanent residency plans where access to victims and other high risk situations is minimized, and to mitigate the often difficult transition from a highly structured and restrictive environment directly to the community. Greater confidence is instilled with respect to the sex offender management practices in place in the community.

This ensures that viable placement plans are developed expeditiously so that youth do not remain in a higher level of care because of a lack of proactive planning. Placement with other family members may be an appropriate alternative. Parental or family risk factors that may negatively impact community stability are addressed. Undoubtedly, returning to the home of origin or an alternative family member will not always be a viable option for some juvenile sex offenders. Finally, with respect to older youth who evidence stability but for whom no reasonable placement options exist, independent living programs are an alternative that should be explored.