Abstract
Halfway houses operate as a form of community supervision, offering a unique opportunity for individuals who have offended to receive housing, support, and other resources to aid in navigating the challenges of re-entry from closed custody. Despite being controversial in the eyes of the public, they have long been viewed by stakeholders as a worthwhile intervention. However, existing literature presents mixed findings on their utility. The current study provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of nine studies providing 17 effect sizes on the effects of halfway houses on recidivism. Findings indicate that halfway houses do not result in any differences for treatment versus comparison group participants with respect to outcomes of arrest (k = 6), conviction (k = 5), or incarceration (k = 6). Additional research is needed to inform best practices for structure and services, and how best to respond to differing participant needs.