Abstract Retributive justice is the preferred penal theory in many countries, especially for serious offences, and is a predominant justification for imprisonment. Retributivists, however, have little to say regarding the state’s role towards returning citizens after release from prison. In reality, paroled individuals struggle with continuing surveillance, poverty, stigma and other significant barriers to housing, employment and health. Thus, rates of recidivism are high. Re-entry services can help, but they are few. Without a proper understanding of the implications of the retributive model, advocates for re-entry services struggle to gain public support or the attention of policy-makers. Recognising that retributivism is not a monolithic theory, and with a focus on the parole period, we argue that key sub-streams of retributivism offer a valuable support for understanding public responsibility for re-entry services. To that end, we offer a conceptual understanding of the core retributive principles that call upon governments to actively assist parolees. We do so by connecting re-entry to the retributive notions of unfair advantage, penal communication and moral reform. Finally, we emphasise two, often neglected, re-entry programmes that fit the core retributive principles and highlight implications for the parole process.