Analyzing the Impact of MCORP on Rearrest Rates

Researcher: Raine Huebner Gloege

Date: September 16th, 2025

Executive Summary

Our analysis did not find statistically significant evidence that the MCORP program affects rearrest rates. Offenders who did not receive MCORP services were rearrested at a rate of 76.3%, while offenders who did were rearrested at a lower rate of 70.1%. This decrease of 620 basis points could be due to chance and may not indicate program success.

Research Objectives

The goal of this study was to assess whether the MCORP program effectively prepares offenders for re-entry into their communities. Offender’s rearrest status during the post-release observation period was used as a measure of success.

Study Details

The Minnesota Department of Corrections, in collaboration with Hennepin, Ramsey, Dodge, Fillmore, and Olmsted County, implemented the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP) in 2008. A total of 689 eligible offenders were randomly assigned to one of two groups: a control group that received standard release services, and a programming group that received additional services (hereafter referred to as the MCORP group). Offenders from both groups were released to one of the five participating counties and were observed until June 30th, 2012. All releases occurred between February 2008 and December 2010.

Analysis Findings

1. Statistical Significance

Although the MCORP group had a lower rearrest rate, the difference was not statistically significant (p-value > 0.05), suggesting that the difference may not represent an effect of the program.

2. Rearrests Summary Table

Rearrested

No

Yes

Total

p-value1

Group

0.076

Control

65 (23.7%)

209 (76.3%)

274 (100.0%)

MCORP

124 (29.9%)

291 (70.1%)

415 (100.0%)

Total

189 (27.4%)

500 (72.6%)

689 (100.0%)

1Pearson's Chi-squared test

Table 1: Rearrest status by group, with proportion of individuals arrested per group and p-value indicating no statistical significance.

3. Magnitude of Difference

Approximately three-fourths of the offenders in both groups were rearrested, with a 620 basis point decrease in the MCORP group compared to the control group (see Figure 1).

4. Visual Comparison

Figure 1. Stacked bar chart comparing rearrest rates for each group using percentages.

Recommendations

While the findings suggest that MCORP services may not have impacted rearrest rates, further investigation is required to understand why this may be and to draw more informed conclusions about the overall success of the program.

Additional areas of investigation could include: