Introduction
he mental, social, economic, and cultural health of a society is closely related to its security. A large part of this sense of security depends on preventing crime and reducing its recurrence [1]. Violence against individuals constitutes a group of crimes that have increased recently [2]. According to the statistical yearbook of Iran in 2018, personal conflicts and strife have tripled from 247869 cases in 2006 to 753974 cases in 2018 [3]. Focusing on the post- imprisonment period is an essential strategy for social reintegration [4]. According to numerous studies, returning to society after the end of imprisonment is difficult for all people. It is accompanied by various problems such as unemployment, restrictions on communication with family and friends, financial instability, drug use, etc. These problems are compounded when a person is convicted of violence [6, 5]. O’Brien has conducted numerous studies on the issues and problems of women after imprisonment between 2001 and 2008. These studies have focused on the issues and problems of this period from the perspective of social work. She identified five categories of barriers in the areas of family support, housing, domestic violence, drug/alcohol abuse treatment, employment and economic well-being. According to her, removing these barriers has an influential role in rebuilding life after imprisonment [7].
The proper transfer of people from prison to society occurs when social rehabilitation and reintegration programs are developed and implemented based on their real needs. The output of this type of transfer increases the quality of life and reduces the recurrence of crime [8, 9, 10, 11]. The increasing tendency to community re-entry of prisoners over the past decade is due to two intertwined issues. First, policymakers know that failure to respond to the needs of individuals after imprisonment endangers social reintegration and public safety. Second, the interventions presented to offenders are effective for a limited number of them in reducing re-incarceration [12].
Most studies on the social reintegration of people with a history of imprisonment have been conducted in the United States and European countries. In Iran, less attention has been paid to the social issues and challenges of post-imprisonment life [7]. Furthermore, no protocol or guideline for social interventions of people released from prison is found in Iran. Neglecting this issue can increase the recurrence of crime and return to prison, as well as the spread of social harm [13]. Therefore, this study aims to develop a specialized social work intervention guideline to create appropriate conditions for successful community re-entry of offenders after release from prison.
Materials and Methods
In this study, to prepare a specialized social work intervention guideline, a qualitative method was used in the following seven steps: 
Identifying the dimensions of successful community re-entry and categorizing them (output of the qualitative section): In this step, 26 semi-structured interviews with individuals with a history of violence and with experts were conducted in 2019. For data analysis, we used Brown and Clarke’s (2006) six-step thematic analysis procedure [14].
Review of studies to prepare a matrix of dimensions of successful community re-entry (output of literature review): A search was conducted in the national and international databases on quantitative studies and protocols and guidelines for the community re-entry using MeSH keywords of “successful re-entry”, “re-entry”, “social reintegration”, “return to the community”, “re-entry successful”.
Preparing an initial pool of barriers and facilitators to successful community re-entry by combining two qualitative and literature review sections based on the emic (qualitative) and etic (literature review) approach of Whittemore and Knafl (2005). We used these tools to analyze and recognize the dimensions of successful community re-entry [15]. Also, thematic synthesis made it possible to identify barriers and facilitators besides similarities and differences [16].
Drafting the specialized intervention guideline: In this stage, an initial draft of the guideline was prepared by the research team based on the previous findings, compliance with existing protocols, and receiving feedback from experts. Five guidelines of “Handbook on the Prevention of Recidivism and the Social Reintegration of Offenders, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 2018” [17], “Guide to the rehabilitation and social reintegration of women prisoners: Implementation of the Bangkok Rules (2019)” [18], “Mapping Prisoner Reentry: An Action Research Guidebook [19]”, “Effective Case Management (implementation of effective practices that will support successful offender outcomes)” [20], and “the World Health Organization handbook for guideline development [21]” were used as a basis for drafting the specialized intervention guideline in this study. Review and development of the drafted guideline: It was done at a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) session.
Assessing the applicability of the designed guideline: It was done using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research And Evaluation (AGREE) tool [22]. The average total report of 10 experts for six domains was 85.7%, indicating that all experts approved the applicability of the guideline. Modifying based on suggestions and criticisms and finalizing the intervention guideline.
Results
According to the experts and the literature based on the case management approach, the guideline draft was compiled by the research team focusing on the information obtained from both qualitative and quantitative parts. Experts in this field were used to review the content in an FGD session. The case management approach is commonly used for caring for people released from prison and those with a history of substance abuse disorders [23]. This approach has empirical scientific support [24]. According to this approach, clients have active participation in providing specialized interventions, and goals are achieved by relying on the interventions provided by social workers and client participation. Therefore, the guideline of specialized social work intervention for community re-entry of offenders based on the case management approach was presented in four main stages: 1) preparation for the case plan, 2) development of the case plan, 3) intervention and action, 4) monitoring and reviewing the intervention (Table 1). 




Discussion and Conclusion
Research shows that in the case management approach, adapting the severity of interventions to the assessed level of risk (e.g. more intensive strategies for high-risk offenders) leads to better outcomes [25]. Throughout the evaluation and intervention planning process, case managers act as a bridge between internal/external resources and individuals to achieve positive change. This bridge seeks to increase prisoners’ motivation and acquire clear cooperation between providers and recipients of services and continued care for people released from prison so that a successful community re-entry can finally be achieved [23]. 
The “Guide to the rehabilitation and social reintegration of women prisoners: Implementation of the Bangkok Rules” [18] is consistent with our guideline. This guideline identifies the various aspects of successful rehabilitation of female prisoners. The main focus is on specific programs and appropriate measures to address the underlying causes of the crime. This guideline covers a wide range of programs, including medical care, mental health care, substance abuse prevention and treatment programs, counseling, psychosocial support, individual and group training courses, employment and vocational training, housing, and more.
Several studies have shown that improving individuals’ psychosocial abilities, such as skills training in challenging situations and correcting communication skills, have significantly prevented the recurrence of violence against individuals [26, 27, 28]. In the present study, the use of educational and counseling programs (individual and family) was considered in the case management program as one of the measures to overcome stressful situations. According to the findings, one of the barriers to community re-entry was stigmatization and rejection by others. Mirhosseini and Larijani (2018) and Kafashi and Eslami (2009) concluded that to prevent the recurrence of crime. For community re-entry of offenders, it is necessary to remove formal and informal labels applied by institutions, friends, family, and society. In the present study, by using social work methods, planning was done to identify these labels and inappropriate environments. Studies by Sutherland, Durkheim, and Cohen have also shown that inappropriate living environments are factors in the emergence and recurrence of crime. Individuals learn criminal behaviors by interacting with groups that carry criminal norms. Labeling causes social alienation, job loss, and leaving family and friends [29]. Therefore, the use of local development methods, social planning, and social action in identifying inappropriate environments, labeling factors, and implementing the necessary interventions in this guideline was recommended. Hezar Jaribi believed that the expansion of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in the form of neighborhood-based and facilitation offices could effectively control social harms comprehensively [30].
Another area highlighted in the guideline in this study was social support with a focus on family. Some studies have shown that the more people are supported and controlled by their family members after release from prison, the less likely they will commit a crime again. For this reason, one of the ways to re-enter the community is to be with family. In this regard, in the present study, group methods and attracting the participation and support of families in improving the situation of the target group were used. In addition to increasing the likelihood of community re-entry, family-centered interventions reduce aggressive behaviors and deviance in children [30]. Other studies have mentioned social support [31], supervision and interaction of family members during and after imprisonment, and socializing with friends [32, 33, 34].
An essential strategy in intervention guides and programs with a case management approach is to seek support from NGOs, charity centers, and other civic associations, given the limitations of government resources [35]. For this reason, in the present guideline, social workers are required to provide a variety of external and internal support for the target group referring to these centers. Support seeking is part of the specialized interventions of social workers that are done with the participation and cooperation of clients. Its effectiveness has been shown in various studies [36, 37]. They also use referral techniques to link the individual to the support resources. Using facilitation methods, social workers provide access to social resources and identify administrative barriers to service delivery. There is a relationship between all the mentioned interventions that lead to achieving the defined goals [38]. In this way, social workers, by various methods and techniques and using the participation, capacity, and capabilities of the individuals and their families, design a unique intervention program for them that can lead to their empowerment.
The outcome of this study was a guideline for social work intervention based on a case management approach for successful community re-entry and reduction of problems related to social rehabilitation. Policymakers and social workers as service providers in post-release care centers are recommended to apply the recommendations in this guideline for the social integration of individuals after the end of imprisonment. Future studies on the effectiveness of this specialized social work intervention guideline, considering local conditions, can help identify the influential factors of community re-entry of people released from prison, especially those convicted of violence against individuals.

Ethical Considerations
Compliance with ethical guidelines
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences (Code: IR.USWR.REC.1399.180).

Funding
This article is part of the findings of the PhD. dissertation of the first author at the Department of Social Work, University of Social Welfare Sciences and Rehabilitation.

Authors' contributions
All authors equally contributed to preparing this article.

Conflict of interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the General Directorate of Prisons of Tehran Province and the Center for Social Services and Post-Exit Care of Tehran Province.


References

1. Zeinali A. [Range of legislative intervention in the field of social problems and deviations (Persian)]. Social Welfare Quarterly. 2009; 9(34):301-20. http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-2418-fa.html
2. Asadolahi A, Baratvand M. [Study of relation between child abuse by parents and wickedness of their child (case study: Wickedness delinquents of Khuzestan) (persian)]. Social Welfare Quarterly. 2006; 5(19):225-52. http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-1956-en.html
3. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2018).UNODC Annual Report 2018 [Internet]. 2018 [Updated 2018]. Available from: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/about-unodc/annual-report.html
4. Ahlin EM, Lobo Antunes MJ. Levels of guardianship in protecting youth against exposure to violence in the community. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice. 2017; 15(1):62-83. [DOI:10.1177/1541204015590000]
5. Zare B, Zandilak AA. [Level of socio-economic development and rates of violent crimes in the provinces (persian)]. Journal of Iranian Social Studies. 2012; 5(3):97-125. http://www.jss-isa.ir/article_21453.html?lang=en
6. Iran Statistical Yearbook. No title [Internet]. 2018 Available from: https://www.amar.org.ir/Portals/1/yearbook/1397/15.pdf
7. Vameghi M, Khodai Ardekani M, Sajadi H. [Domestic violence in Iran: Review of 2001-2008 literature (Persian)]. Social Welfare Quarterly. 2014; 13(50):37-70. http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-1354-en.html
8. Mirhosseini Z, Larijani M. [Identifying the context of designing a model for successful social integration of offender women: a grounded theory approach (persian)]. Women in Development & Politics. 2018; 16(1):51-78. [DOI:10.22059/JWDP.2018.246504.1007316]
9. Cepeda JA, Vetrova MV, Lyubimova AI, Levina OS, Heimer R, Niccolai LM. Community reentry challenges after release from prison among people who inject drugs in St. Petersburg, Russia. International Journal of Prisoner Health. 2015; 11(3):183-92. [DOI:10.1108/IJPH-03-2015-0007] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Choi J, Dulisse B. The Importation of violent “codes” of south korean inmates. The Prison Journal. 2020; 100(3):287-311. [DOI:10.1177/0032885520916816]
11. Chikadzi V. Challenges facing ex-offenders when reintegration in to mainstream society in Gauteng South Africa. Social Work. 2017; 53(2):288-300. [DOI:10.15270/53-2-569]
12. Sadeghi Fasaie S, Mirhosseini Z. [Life after prison: the challenges of reconstruction for women (persian)]. Strategic Rssearch on Social Problems in Iran University of Isfahan. 2017; 6(3):31-50. [DOI:10.22108/SSOSS.2017.85536.0]
13. Denney A, Tewksbury R, Jones R. Structure for successful offender reentry. Journal of Qualitative Criminal Justice & Criminology. 2014; 2(1):39-67. https://epublications.marquette.edu/socs_fac/96/
14. Belenko S. Assessing released inmates for substance-abuse-related service needs. Crime and Delinquency. 2006; 52(1):94-113. [DOI:10.1177/0011128705281755]
15. Freeman R. Can we close the revolving door?: Recidivism vs. employment of ex-offenders in the U.S. Symposium at the Urban Institute Reentry Roundtable, New York University Law School; 2003. [DOI:10.1037/e717762011-001]
16. Mellow J, Christian J. Transitioning offenders to the community: A content analysis of reentry guides. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. 2008; 47(4):339-55. [DOI:10.1080/10509670801992111]
17. Wilson AJ, Davis RC. Good intentions meet hard realities: An evaluation of the project greenlight reentry program. Criminology and Public Policy. 2006; 5(2):303-38. [DOI:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00380.x]
18. Listwan SJ. Reentry for serious and violent offenders:an analysis of program attrition. Criminal Justice Policy Review. 2009; 20(2):154-69. [DOI:10.1177/0887403408325700]
19. Travis J, Visher C. Prisoner reentry and crime in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511813580]
20. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006; 3(2):77-101. [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
21. Visher C. Incarcerated fathers: Pathways from prisonto home. Journal of Criminal Justice 2013; 24(1):9-26. [DOI:10.1177/0887403411418105]
22. Miller HV, Miller JM. Community in-reach through jail reentry: findings from a quasi-experimental design. Justice Quarterly. 2010; 27(6):893-910. [DOI:10.1080/07418825.2010.482537]
23. Petersilia J. When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003. https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/cv_Qc2dpL8AC?hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiDovaC6Yr0AhVknVwKHbnKDQAQre8FegQIERAI
24. Cnaan RA, Draine J, Fraizer B, Sinha JW. Ex-prisoners’ re-entry: An emerging frontier and a social work challenge. Journal of Policy Practice. 2008. 7(2-3):178-98. [DOI:10.1080/15588740801938035]
25. Toi H. Professional values and conflict among social workers in prisons: an examination of role stress, strain, and job satisfaction in working with inmates with mental illness and/or substance use disorders [PhD. dissertation]. Mansfield: University of Connecticut; 2015. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/992/
26. Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2005; 52(5):546-53. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x] [PMID]
27. Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: A critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2009; 9(59):1-11. [DOI:10.1186/1471-2288-9-59] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. Chin V, Dandurand Y. Introductory handbook on the prevention of recidivism and the social reintegration of offenders. Criminal justice Handbook series [Internet]. 2018. https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/crimeprevention/Introductory_Handbook_on_the_Prevention_of_Recidivism_and_the_Social_Reintegration_of_Offenders.pdf
29. Crowley M. Guide to the rehabilitation and social reintegration of women prisoners [Internet]. 2019 [Updated 2019 May 13]. Available from: https://knowledge.tijthailand.org/en/publication/detail/bangkok-rules#book/
30. Nancy GJ, Brazzell D. Cowan mapping prisoner reentry: An action research guidebook [Internet]. 2006. Available from: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/213675.pdf
31. Phyllis Modley, Center for Effective Public Policy and Rachelle Giguere, Center for Effective Public Policy. Reentry considerations for women offenders [Internet]. 2010. Available from: https://cepp.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Reentry-Considerations-for-Women-Offenders-2010.pdf
32. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO handbook for guideline development. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/145714
33. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. AGREE II: Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2010; 182(18):83-42. [DOI:10.1503/cmaj.090449] [PMID] [PMCID]
34. Prendergast M, Cartier JJ. Improving parolees’ participation in drug treatment and other services through strengths case management. Perspectives. 2008; 32(1):38-46. [PMID] [PMCID]
35. Lipsey M. The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic Overview. Victims & Offenders. 2009; 4(2):124-47. [DOI:10.1080/15564880802612573]
36. Willis GM, Ward T, Levenson JS. The Good Lives Model (GLM): An evaluation of GLM operationalization in North American treatment programs. Sexual Abuse. 2014; 26(1):58-81. [DOI:10.1177/1079063213478202] [PMID]
37. Paparozzi MA, Gendreau P. An intensive supervision program that worked: Service delivery, professional orientation, and organizational supportiveness. The Prison Journal. 2005; 85(4):445-66.] [DOI:10.1177/0032885505281529]
38. Lattimore PK, Visher CA. The impact of prison reentry services on short-term outcomes: Evidence from a multisite evaluation. Evaluation Review. 2013; 37(3-4):274-313. [DOI:10.1177/0193841X13519105] [PMID]
39. Osher F, Steadman HJ, Barr H. A best practice approach to community reentry from jails for inmates with co-occurring disorders: The apic model. Crime & Delinquency. 2003; 49(1):79-96. [DOI:10.1177/0011128702239237]
40. Hunter BA, Lanza AS, Lawlor M, Dyson W, Gordon DM. A strengths-based approach to prisoner reentry: The fresh start prisoner reentry program. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 2016; 60(11):1298-314. [DOI:10.1177/0306624X15576501] [PMID] [PMCID]
41. Andrews D, Dowden C. The risk-need-responsivity model of assessment and human service in prevention and corrections: crime-prevention jurisprudence. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice. 2007; 49(4):439-64. [DOI:10.3138/cjccj.49.4.439]
42. Ashouri M, Ghasemi Moghadam H. [Methods of actuarial crime risk assessment (Persian)]. Private Low Studies Quarterly. 2014; 43(4):1-18. [DOI:10.22059/JLQ.2014.50102]
43. Andrews DA, Bonta J, Wormith JS. The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime & Delinquency. 2006; 52(1):7-27. [DOI:10.1177/0011128705281756]
44. Niven S, Stewart D. Resettlement outcomes on release from prison in 2003 [Internet]. 2005 [Updated 2005]. Available from: https://lemosandcrane.co.uk/resources/Home%20Office%20248%20-%20Resettlement%20outcomes%20on%20release%20from%20prison.pdf
45. Nasirzadeh M. The process of designing, implementation and evaluation of theory-based educational interventions. Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences. 2020; 19(5):549-52. [DOI:10.29252/jrums.19.5.549]
46. Turner S, Perersilia J. Work Release in Washington: Effects on recidivism and corrections costs. The Prison Journal. 1996; 76(2):138-64. [DOI:10.1177/0032855596076002003]
47. Ruch DA, Yoder JR. The effects of family contact on community reentry plans among incarcerated youths. Victims & Offenders. 2018; 13(5):609-27. [DOI:10.1080/15564886.2017.1401571]
48. Bouffard JA, Bergseth KJ. The impact of reentry services on juvenile offenders’ recidivism. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice. 2008; 6(3):295-318. [DOI:10.1177/1541204007313384]
49. Shivy VA, Guion DB, Green BA, Wingate JA. INTUIT: A career decision-making intervention for female offenders in reentry. Journal of Career Development. 2019; 46(2):144-56. [DOI:10.1177/0894845317731156]
50. Garland B, Wodahl E, Saxon C. What influences public support of transitional housing facilities for offenders during reentry? Criminal Justice Policy Review. 2017; 28(1):18-40. [DOI:10.1177/0887403414564866]
51. Ramakers A, Nieuwbeerta P, Van Wilsem J, Dirkzwager A. Not just any job will do: A study on employment characteristics and recidivism risks after release. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 2017; 61(16):1795-818. [DOI:10.1177/0306624X16636141] [PMID] [PMCID]
52. Rapp RC, Van Den Noortgate W, Broekaert E, Vanderplasschen W. The efficacy of case management with persons who have substance abuse problems: A three-level meta-analysis of outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2014; 82(4):605-18. [DOI:10.1037/a0036750] [PMID]
53. Solomon P. The efficacy of case management services for severely mentally disabled clients. Community Mental Health Journal. 1992; 28(3):163-80. [DOI:10.1007/BF00756815] [PMID]
54. Rasouli F. [The impact of anger control training on resiliency in adolescents with addiction preparation (Persian)]. Scientific Quarterly of Research on Addiction. 2011; 4(16):7-24. http://etiadpajohi.ir/article-1-366-en.html
55. Sadeghi S, Farajzadegan Z, Kelishadi R, Heidari K. Aggression and violence among Iranian adolescents and youth: A 10-year systematic review. International Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2014; 5(2):83-96. [DOI:10.4103/2008-7802.157663] [PMID]
56. Roustai A, Abolghasemi S, Mohammadi Arya A, Saedi S. [A comparison effect of training the anger management and medicine cure on aggression in prisoners (Persian)]. Journal of Social Psychology. 2011; 7(21):19-31. https://www.sid.ir/fa/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=160120
57. Kafashi, M., Eslami, E. The study of effective factors on re-offending and reentry to prison in the province of Northern Khorasan (Persian)]. Journal of Social Reserch. 2009; 2(4):57-69. https://www.sid.ir/en/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=181879
58. Hezar Jaribi J, Safari Shali R. [Factors affecting the commitment of crimes (Case study: Markazi province prisoners) (Persian)]. Social Sciences. 2009; 16(46):41-74. https://qjss.atu.ac.ir/article_5383.html?lang=en
59. Hochstetler A, DeLisi M, Pratt TC. Social support and feelings of hostility among released inmates. Crime & Delinquency. 2010; 56(4):588-607. [DOI:10.1177/0011128708319926]
60. Kelso KT. A family affair: The effects of familial relations on offender recidivism [PhD. dissertation]. Detroit: Wayne State University; 2012. https://www.proquest.com/openview/9b17b0d0dc7c1b8fe12ed102ead08287/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
61. Léger A. Restoration or retribution: An empricial examination of the recidivistic patterns of a group of young offenders from new York city [MA. thesis]. Ontario: Queen’s University; 2009. https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/handle/1974/5364
62. Ramsden V, Martin R, McMillan J, Granger-Brown A, Tole B. Participatory health research within a prison setting: A qualitative analysis of ‘Paragraphs of passion. Global Health Promotion 2015; 22(4):48-55. [DOI:10.1177/1757975914547922] [PMID]
63. McNutt J. Is social work advocacy worth the cost? Issues and barriers to an economic analysis of social work political practice. Research on Social Work Practice. 2011; 21(4):397-40. [DOI:10.1177/1049731510386624]
64. Dalrymple J, Boylan J. Effective advocacy in social work. New York: SAGE; 2015. https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/QsmYAQAACAAJ?hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwisgJPOpov0AhUvz4UKHT7eB9UQre8FegQIDhAJ
65. Ronen T. Collaboration on critical questions in child psychotherapy: A model linking referral, assessment, intervention, and evaluation. Journal of Social Work Education. 2001; 37(1):91-110. [DOI:10.1080/10437797.2001.10779039]