Cost Effectiveness of Treatment for People on Probation Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D. Faye Taxman, Ph.D. Jee Vang Meridith Thanner Victoria Doyon.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Walter A. McNeil, Secretary Florida Department of Corrections Public Safety and Domestic Security Policy Committee Policy Committee October 6, 2009.
Advertisements

1 Michigan Department of Corrections Office of Community Corrections  Office of Community Corrections was created pursuant to Public Act 511 of 1988,
Local Utility of Cost Benefit Analysis
" The Impact of Criminal Justice Policies and Practices on Minorities" 2009.
Conducting Research in Challenging Times: California Parolee Reentry Court Evaluation Association of Criminal Justice Research, California March
RECIDIVISM STUDY PROPOSAL MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION AND REHABILITATION DETENTION SERVICES DETENTION SERVICES PRE-RELEASE AND REENTRY SERVICES.
1 The Importance of Successful Reentry to Jail Population Growth Presented by: Allen J. Beck, Chief Corrections Statistics Program Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Re-Entry and Recidivism
BJS CORRECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
Police chiefs | formerly incarcerated people | pretrial service administrators | probation officials | state legislators | substance abuse treatment providers.
Maine DHHS Subsidy Programs Who Qualifies? How to Apply? Sheldon Wheeler, Maine DHHS Chester Barnes, Maine DHHS Virginia Dill, Shalom House.
Alternatives to Incarceration and Care Coordination May 12, 2015.
Metro Detroit’s Community Summit on Ending Homelessness YOUTHS INMATES PATIENTS DISCHARGING.
Council of State Governments Justice Center | 1 Michael Thompson, Director Council of State Governments Justice Center July 28, 2014 Washington, D.C. Measuring.
1 Diversion and Jail Discharge Strategies Presentation by Ron Honberg, NAMI National Alliance to End Homelessness Conference Washington, DC July 18, 2006.
Denise Biron Julie Chavez Dara Robichaux.  Who are we? Denise Biron, Psy.D., Norfolk Department of Human Services, Julie Chavez, PO Senior at Norfolk.
Re-validation of the Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instrument: Preliminary Findings.
Second Chances: Housing and Services for Re-entering Prisoners National Alliance to End Homelessness Annual Conference Nikki Delgado Program Manager Corporation.
Chapter 13 Parole Conditions and Revocation. Introduction Parole conditions determine the amount of freedom versus restriction a parolee has Accomplishment.
Criminal Justice Mental Health and Substance Abuse Reinvestment Grant Housing Strategies Ellen Piekalkiewicz Department of Children and Families Florida.
Implementing Evidence Based Principles into Supervision March 20,2013 Mack Jenkins, Chief Probation Officer County of San Diego.
Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform : System-wide Criminal Justice Spending June 3, 2015.
Evaluation of the Connecticut Judicial Branch’s Three Court-Mandated Family Violence Programs: FVEP, EXPLORE, and EVOLVE Stephen M. Cox, Ph.D, Professor.
Drug Court ♦The alternative to incarceration  History žHow and why the experiment evolved  Main Features of Drug Court žCooperation within the adversarial.
WORKING WITH INCARCERATED NCPS Ray Eibel EDSI ERICSA 50 th Annual Training Conference & Exposition ▪ May 19 – 23 ▪ Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista, Florida.
1 DSHS | Research and Data Analysis Division ● MAYFIELD ● OCTOBER 2013 Drug Court Evaluation Using “Big Data” Presented at the Washington State Association.
Participant Choice – Access to Recovery as a Voucher Service Delivery Model Presented to National Summit on Prisoner Re-Entry Sponsored by the White House.
In Crisis: Clinical Solutions for the Revolving Door Mary Ruiz MBA, CEO Melissa Larkin Skinner LMHC, CCO Florida's Premier Behavioral Health Annual Conference.
Table 1 Introduction  Overview  While predictors of recidivism and technical violations are often examined in probation and parole outcome research,
Council of State Governments Justice Center | 1 Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Michael Thompson, Director June 22,
By Jacqueline Gallegos ……to  Chaired by Judge Wells  Invited Executive Level Management  Working toward Local Implementation ◦ Local government.
1 Roseville Home Start Timothy A. Capron, Ph.D. California State University, Sacramento Division of Criminal Justice Member, Board of Directors, Home Start.
Housing: A Significant Reentry Barrier Nicole E. Sullivan NC Department of Correction Office of Research and Planning.
Introduction The United States has one of the largest criminal justice populations in the world with over 6.94 million people under the supervision of.
Impact of Online Counseling Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D..
The Conflict Perspective Class, Crime, and the Criminal Justice System.
Chapter 12 Parole and Release to the Community 1.
North Carolina TASC NC TASC Bridging Systems for Effective Offender Care Management.
Ursula Hill February 2012 Notre Dame-AmeriCorps Mid-Year Conference.
And They All Come Home. Shawshank Redemption watch?v=KtwXlIwozog.
Introduction Overview of the ASUS-R  The Adult Substance Use Survey - Revised (ASUS-R; Wanberg, 2004) is a self-report screening tool intended to:  identify.
Salient Factor Score CTSFS99. What it is How to use it.
URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to The Urban Institute, its trustees, or.
Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D., Mary Haack, Ph.D., Susie Nemes, Ph.D., Angela Harge, M.Ed., Heibatollah Baghi, Ph.D. This research was supported by a grant from.
OFFENDER REENTRY: A PUBLIC SAFETY STRATEGY Court Support Services Division.
Methods Data for this NIDA-funded HIV prevention trial (Project WORTH) were drawn from 337 women offenders under community supervision, who reported using.
Enhanced Services for the Hard-to-Employ Project Transitional Jobs for Ex-Prisoners: Early Impacts from a Random Assignment Evaluation of the Center for.
Nora Wikoff August 19, Former prisoners face hurdles to gainful employment Recidivism rates are high among former prisoners Prison- and community-based.
Introduction Results Treatment Needs and Treatment Completion as Predictors of Return-to-Prison Following Community Treatment for Substance-Abusing Female.
Faculty of Arts Hannah Graham Associate Lecturer in Criminology & Sociology, and current PhD candidate School of Sociology & Social Work, UTAS
Outreach Opportunities for 2015: Reaching the Justice Population in Pennsylvania Elizabeth Hagan, Senior Policy Analyst.
2007 Point in Time Survey Highlights Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Advisory Council on Homelessness.
Presents. The Community Housing Program and Starship.
Criminal Justice Policy & Planning Division STATE OF CONNECTICUT OFFICE OF POLICY & MANAGEMENT (OPM) 1 ANNUAL REPORTS.
Cleveland Municipal Drug Court: SAMHSA CSAT Adult Treatment Drug Court Grant Dr. Margaret Baughman Madison Wheeler, BS Paul Tuschman, BA Begun.
Improving Access to Mental Health Services: A Community Systems Approach Leslie Mahlmeister, MBA PhD Student Department of Political Science Wayne State.
The Minnesota Youthbuild Program Costs and Benefits to the State of Minnesota Nancy Waisanen, Youthbuild Coordinator February 5, 2011.
Medication Adherence and Substance Abuse Predict 18-Month Recidivism among Mental Health Jail Diversion Program Clients Elizabeth N. Burris 1, Evan M.
When Discrimination is Legal: The Social Costs of Felony Convictions
BCJ 3150: Probation and Parole
Chapter 10: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost Analysis Designs
Summit County Probation Services
Graduate School of Social Work
Eighth Judicial District Court Mental Health Court Program
BJS CORRECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
Developing an Effective Assisted Outpatient Treatment Program
Beyond the referral Presented by:
1 Panel 2, Position 5 Jack D. Ripper.
Recidivism Among DWI Offenders in New Mexico (Preliminary Results)
DRUG COURTS IN ILLINOIS
Presentation transcript:

Cost Effectiveness of Treatment for People on Probation Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D. Faye Taxman, Ph.D. Jee Vang Meridith Thanner Victoria Doyon

Treatment Could Help Probation Over 4 million people on probation with little effect on recidivism Treatment and employment reduces recidivism  Does the benefits justify the cost? The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP)  High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA)  Demonstration of a seamless probation program in the Baltimore-Washington, DC corridor

Perspective Government agencies costs Others  Clinician  Clients  Payers and insurers  Victims  Society

Population Examined Traditional ProbationSeamless Probation Variable Moderate-Risk (N = 75) High-Risk (N = 66) Moderate-Risk (N = 62) High-Risk (N = 69) Black, % Male, %77*** Married, % Age, years (sd)31.1 (9.8)*28.2 (9.4)31.3 (10.3)30.0 (7.8) Ever HIV Tested, % Negative, % Alcohol use in the past 30 days, % Drug use in the past 30 days, % Report committing criminal act in past year, %89*7889*77 Currently under parole, %230*5 Incarcerated during past year, %52***7863*77 Employed during the past 30 days, %74* Average legal income earned past 30 days, $792 (886)661 (909)1005 (1532)830 (1939) Table 1: No statistical significant difference between traditional and seamless groups at baseline ***p .01 ** p .05 * p .10 (significance tests run between seamless and traditional group)

Source of Data Self-report  We interviewed offenders at baseline and at 12 months Treatment & probation utilization Drug testing Re-arrest from FBI records Unit costs  Budget of the agencies  Literature review

Analytical Model

Probability of Participating in Treatment Traditional ProbationSeamless probation While under supervision Anytime during follow-up While under supervision Anytime during follow-up Number of cases Number of follow- up days per client Number of treatment days per client Daily probability of treatment per client * 10.4% * 7.5% * 17.9% * 14.6% * Table 2 Treatment Utilization * p<.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Reduced Drug use Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all offenders in group While under supervision For all offenders in group While under supervision Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of positive drug tests per client Daily probability of positive drug test per client + 0.3% * 0.4%0.3% * 0.4% Table 3 Relapse to Drug Use * p<.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values + A positive drug test is assumed to represent 7 days prior and 7 days post the test date unless another test is available contradicting this assumption

Daily Probability of Supervision Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, treatment For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, treatment Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of supervision days per client Daily probability of supervision per client 70.1 * 97.0 * 68.5 * 85.7 * Table 4: Daily Probability of Being Under Supervision * p<.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Recidivism Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of arrests per client Probability of arrest per client7% * 20% * 6% * 10% * Table 6: Daily Probability of Arrest * p<.05 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Conviction & Length of Prison Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of days in prison per client Daily probability of incarceration per client * 0.7% * 5.4% * 0.8% * 6.3% * Table 7: Probability of a Day in Prison * p<.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Unemployment Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of days employed per client Daily probability of employment per client 6.7% * 26.0% * 4.4% * 22.1% * Table 8: Probability of Employment * p<0.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Mental Illness Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of days in mental health hospital per client Daily probability of hospitalization for mental health per client 0.02% * 0.006% * 0.08% * 0.1% * Table 9: Probability of Mental Health Hospitalization * p<0.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Physical Hospitalization Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of days in general hospital per client Daily probability of hospitalization for physical illness per client 0.03% * 0.008% * 0.1% * Table 9 (continued): Probability of Hospitalization for Physical Illness * p<.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Probability of Homelessness Traditional ProbationSeamless probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation For all clients in the group While in, or one month after, probation Number of cases Number of follow-up days per client Number of days in shelter per client Daily probability of homelessness per client 0.08% * 0.00% * 0.4% * 0.2% * Table 10: Probability of Homelessness * p<.01 for difference between corresponding seamless and traditional probation values

Cost of a Day of Probation Agency costs Investigative reporting++ Seamless supervision++ Traditional supervision++ Personnel services$1,191,362$163,182$79,320$948,859 Contractual services$11,984$1,641$798$9,544 Supplies & materials$9,436$1,293$628$7,516 Building rental$206,144$28,236$13,725$164,183 Equipment rentals*$122,083$16,722$8,128$97,233 Information services+$148,621$20,357$9,895$118,369 Economic cost of volunteers5,013$687$334$3,993 Total$1,694,643$232,117$112,828$1,349,697 Cost per work day$6,009$823$400$4,786 Number of client- days 15,7929,588206,424 Cost per day per client $15$12$7

Cost of Day of Treatment CategoryTotal CROP program Outpatient program Methadone program Personnel1,266,65164,425732,452469,774 Building lease value75,4355,37248,27521,788 Equipment lease value65,4202,45626,77336,191 Operations47,4251,25915,88830,278 Centralized management397,25915,814240,449140,996 Total costs1,852,18989,3251,063,836699,027 Enrollment days based on counselor’s estimated panel size 9,49089,79040,150 Enrollment days based on time between most recent discharge & admission dates 11,04344,86057,945 Cost per enrollment day $8.70$15.80$14.25 Table 12: Cost of a Day of Treatment This work is based on Alemi F, Sullivan T. An example of activity based costing of treatment programs using time between discharges (in review)

Cost of Arrest & Criminal Justice Number of cases in millions Expenditure in 2001 in millions Cost per case in 2001 Cost per case inflated to 2004 prices Police arrests13.7$72,406$ $ Adult judicial cases92.8$37,751$406.80$ Table 12: Cost of Arrest & Court Processing Includes local, State and Federal costs. Data are based on Bauer L, Owens SD. Justice expenditure and Employment in the United States 2001, Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, May 2004.

Cost of Prison The Bureau of Justice Statistics:  Cost of a day in prison to be $62.01 in % inflation in prison costs in prior years Cost of a day in prison in 2004 to be $74.27

Cost of Day of Hospitalization Secretary of Health’s report to Congress inflated to 2004: $1, Maryland’s hospital cost reports: $1,868 per day of hospitalization in 2004

Cost of Day of Homelessness Fair Market rent set by U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development as part of Section 8 Housing Assistance:  2004 for Washington DC- Maryland –Virginia- West Virginia metropolitan area: $30.43 per day for an efficiency apartment

Cost of Day of Employment AlexandriaMontgomery County SeamlessTraditionalSeamlessTraditional Average Income Per Day 1, (sd)$61.64 ($86.19) $66.32 ($96.18) $49.53 ($68.42) $46.63 ($65.96) Estimated per day tax on income based on single exemption $1.8$2.18$1.01$0.82 Any Full-Time Work, % Any Part-Time Work, % Table 13: Income Per Day at First Follow-up (12 month retrospective) 1 Months worked past year times average monthly income divided by 240 working days

So what? Expected costs  Does treatment pay for itself? What if we have better treatment? What if supervision is longer?