Men's Indigenous Intervention Centres: Release Outcomes

What we did

The release characteristics and post-release outcomes for Indigenous men who were admitted to a federal institution between April 1, 2018 and March 15, 2020 and participated in IICs (N = 477) were compared to Indigenous men who were eligible but did not participate (N = 297). In order to participate in IICs, offenders were required to meet certain eligibility criteria related to shorter sentence length, non-sexual offence types^{Footnote 1}  program eligibility (i.e., none or moderate program needs), and a willingness to work with an Elder/Spiritual Advisor and participate in the Indigenous continuum of care. Release outcomes were examined as of March 15, 2022.

What we found

In support of gradual reintegration, IIC participants were significantly more likely to have successfully completed Escorted Temporary Absences (ETAs) while incarcerated, and personal development ETAs in particular. Compared to Indigenous men who were eligible but did not participate in IICs, IIC participants were more likely to have a parole hearing scheduled during the study timeframe. Of the scheduled parole hearings, IIC participants and the comparison group were equally likely to waive, withdraw, or postpone their parole review. Of those with a hearing, IIC participants were more likely than the comparison group to be granted discretionary release in the form of day or full parole.

During the study timeframe, 75.3% (n = 359) of IIC participants and 62.3% (n = 185) of the comparison group had been released. Indigenous men who participated in IICs were significantly more likely to be released on day or full parole. IIC participants also made greater use of culturally-specific release options. For instance, IIC participants were significantly more likely to serve their release in an Indigenous community, or in an urban area with the support and direction of an Indigenous organization through a Section 84^{Footnote 2}  release plan. They were also more likely than the comparison group to reside in a Section 81^{Footnote 2}  Healing Lodge operated by an Indigenous community or partner organization during their release.

Of those offenders that had been released, IIC participants and the comparison group had similar rates of suspensions of release and returns to custody. However, IIC participants spent a significantly longer period in the community prior to suspension (154 days vs. 103 days) and/or revocation (270 days vs. 188 days) of release. In addition, once controlling for Criminal Risk Index level, IIC participants were 60% more likely to be successfully maintained in the community or complete their release without a suspension or revocation than Indigenous men who were eligible but did not participate in IICs.

What it means

Consistent with the objectives of the IIC model, Indigenous men who participate in IICs experience greater access to discretionary release and more successful post-release outcomes. While the IIC model begins at intake, these results suggest that IIC participants continue involvement in culturally appropriate and restorative options as they transition to the community.

For more information   

For questions and/or more information, please email the Research Branch. You can also visit the Research Publications section for a full list of reports and one-page summaries.

Prepared by: Laura Hanby & Shanna Farrell MacDonald