JUSTICE FOR ALL 2.7.3. RELEASE The research has revealed that, in all partner countries, persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities are frequently not assisted or offered services after their sentences reach an end. Furthermore, in prisons, programmes aimed at facilitating reintegration after release that may be available to some detainees who are nearing the end of their sentences, are often unsuited to the needs of persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities, or entirely unavailable to them. It was reported that such persons have a higher chance of not being taken care of by their families, of ending up unemployed or even homeless. Experts have reported that it is very difficult for persons with intellectual and/ or psychosocial disabilities to leave prisons or other institutions where security measures are carried out. The reason is that in order to be granted (conditional) release, there must be a plan in place as to where the person can go afterwards. A lack of social support system or a lack of adequate housing options in the community can negatively impact release prospects. Generally, the research has not revealed many promising practices with regard to post-release services for persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities. Halfway Houses, such as in Lithuania, have been cited as potentially promising (see case study in Annex 5). Half-way houses in Lithuania aim to ensure the continuity of the social rehabilitation of detainees, facilitate their employment activities (i.e., work, education, studies), as well as the intensive preparation for their release on parole. Although Halfway Houses are not exclusively for persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities (around 3% of all detainees serve their sentence in a half-way house), they are considered to be beneficial for them for several reasons: half-way houses have small communities of detainees and the number of staff is higher than in other detention facilities; and half-way houses provide a wide range of social and community activities and the opportunity to strengthen relationships with relatives and loved ones, as detainees are able to go home on leave for up to two days a week. However, such placements are temporary solutions, with the goal of leading to independent living in the community and may not be suitable for some persons with intellectual and/ or psychosocial disabilities who are not able to live independently. Similarly, in Germany, there exist some forensic residential groups used as aftercare facilities with follow-up socio-therapeutic rehabilitation measures for detainees in forensic hospitals. They provide a living space for persons concerned and support them in developing independence. The move-in can already begin during the ongoing detention in the clinic as a form of trial housing. The duration of the stay usually depends on factors such as supervision of the person's conduct, supervision orders and the person's stage of development.282 It has been mentioned – in Austria, Bulgaria, Italy, Slovenia, as well as other countries – that one of the major challenges is an ongoing reluctance to (conditionally) release persons from security measures. One of the main reasons is the (fear of) “public denunciation and critique” in cases of recidivism of persons with intellectual and/or psychosocial disabilities who are released.283 In Italy, persons are rarely released from the REMS directly into the community; most released persons come under other supervision measures instead, often for a long time (see the case study in Annex 4). This challenge also pertains to the aforementioned forensic residential groups in Germany. Cooperation between the hospital and these facilities is often complicated because there are doubts concerning the detainees and the control measures in place after their release. Socio-therapeutic institutions, residential homes, residential groups, as well as outpatient doctors, psychotherapists and social workers often refuse to accept (former) detainees because of their offences. However, if persons concerned do not find follow-up accommodation or have their own flat, their detention can be prolonged or they have to rely on homeless shelters.284 Another issue that has been noted is that in Austria, detainees serving a “regular” prison sentence are habitually granted conditional release after serving two-thirds of their sentence.285 77