Transition from Prison to the Community/Transition Model Initiative ARC Presentation May 14, 2015 Presenters: Dan Chesnut, DOC Gordon Swensen, USOR.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Evidence Based Practices Lars Olsen, Director of Treatment and Intervention Programs Maine Department of Corrections September 4, 2008.
Advertisements

Reducing Recidivism Reducing the Rate and Use of Incarceration Reducing Recidivism Reducing the Rate and Use of Incarceration What Works and Best Practices.
Walter A. McNeil, Secretary Florida Department of Corrections Public Safety and Domestic Security Policy Committee Policy Committee October 6, 2009.
Ex-Offenders and Housing
What is the term that defines the men and women we supervise? Parolee Probationer Offender Supervised Releasee Restored Citizen Returning Citizen Client.
Bureau of Justice Assistance JUSTICE AND MENTAL HEALTH COLLABORATIONS Bureau of Justice Assistance JUSTICE AND MENTAL HEALTH COLLABORATIONS Presentation.
Evidence-Based Intervention Services Community Corrections Partnership October 27, 2011.
“Justice Reinvestment through Policy Analysis in South Carolina” South Carolina State Senator Gerald Malloy 1.
State Administrative Agency (SAA) 2007 Re-Entry Grant Training Workshop The Governor’s Crime Commission Re-Entry Grants and Federal Resource Support Programs.
Regional Conference to End Homelessness Norfolk, VA March 2012 Prepared by: Housing Innovations.
Study of Expansion of Rehabilitation Programs for Inmates in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties Report February 18, 2012 Tryon Library.
PROJECT FUNDING PROVIDED BY R e-entering O ffenders A chieving R ecovery ROAR offers reintegration and recovery services to male adult offenders transitioning.
Funding the Work of Reentry Julie Boehm, Reentry Manager Missouri Department of Corrections.
DOC REENTRY SERVICES TEAM Reentry Services Director Gary Johnson Reentry Program Manager Tim Lanz Community Reentry Coordinator Farris Bell Facilities.
National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention April 2 & 3, Square miles 1,000,000 + people 10 th largest U.S. city 4 th Safest U.S. city.
Second Chances: Housing and Services for Re-entering Prisoners National Alliance to End Homelessness Annual Conference Nikki Delgado Program Manager Corporation.
Implementing Evidence Based Principles into Supervision March 20,2013 Mack Jenkins, Chief Probation Officer County of San Diego.
DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE: WHAT WE DO AND HOW WE’RE DOING. March 10, 2014 Anchorage Youth Development Coalition JPO Lee Post.
THE COALITION OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROVIDERS OF NEW JERSEY The Role of Community Resource Centers in Offender Re-entry.
NSW Interagency Guidelines for Child Protection Intervention 2006 Briefing Information Session Child Protection Senior Officers Group.
Evidence-based Practices (EBP) in Corrections
Chapter 40 Rehabilitation. Objectives Identify the major factors that affect criminal behavior Explain the role of correctional treatment programs in.
CJPAC Cross-Training August 2010 State of Connecticut Department of Correction.
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 2011 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PLAN AUGUST 30, 2011.
Presentation Outline Why we need a prisoner reentry program What is happening with MPRI statewide What is happening locally How you can help Questions.
By Jacqueline Gallegos ……to  Chaired by Judge Wells  Invited Executive Level Management  Working toward Local Implementation ◦ Local government.
NAMI Conference February 10, 2015 “Changing Lives: Changing Futures” Operating Rehabilitative Detention Facilities NAMI Conference February 10, 2015 “Changing.
1 1 Bureau of Justice Assistance: Resources for Tribal Justice Systems October 19, 2012.
North Carolina TASC Clinical Series Training Module One: Understanding TASC.
Criminal Justice Reform in California Challenges and Opportunities Mia Bird Northern California Grantmakers Annual Conference – From Ideas to Action May.
Housing: A Significant Reentry Barrier Nicole E. Sullivan NC Department of Correction Office of Research and Planning.
Risk/Needs Assessment Within the Criminal Justice System.
Shaping the Future of Transition Office of Transition Services NC Department of Correction May 2007.
Maine Board of Corrections March 25, 2009 Maine’s Unified Correctional System Design Development Process Discussion Presents: ONE MAINE ONE MAINE ONE SYSTEM.
Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office Special Investigations Unit n 98% of our investigations involve crimes where the victim has been assaulted by someone.
Evidence-Based Reentry Practices in a Jail Setting
North Carolina TASC NC TASC Bridging Systems for Effective Offender Care Management.
Transition from Prison to Community Initiative Abt Associates and National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to Community Initiative MPRI.
1 Therapeutic Community Treatment in Correctional Settings The Call for An Integrated System George De Leon, Ph.D. Center for Therapeutic Community Research.
Salient Factor Score CTSFS99. What it is How to use it.
Maine Board of Corrections March 18, 2009 Maine’s Unified Correctional System Design Development Process Discussion Corrections Working Group Presents:
AJ 50 – Introduction to Administration of Justice Chapter 10 – Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections.
Missouri Reentry… It’s a Process! George A. Lombardi, Director Missouri Department of Corrections.
OFFENDER REENTRY: A PUBLIC SAFETY STRATEGY Court Support Services Division.
Introduction Results Treatment Needs and Treatment Completion as Predictors of Return-to-Prison Following Community Treatment for Substance-Abusing Female.
Chapter 14 Prevention and Corrections in the Community 1.
ACCELERATED COMMUNITY ENTRY (ACE) A program designed to increase the success of high risk offenders returning to the community from prison Western District.
ACCELERATED COMMUNITY ENTRY United States District Court Western District of Michigan Robert Holmes Bell Chief Judge.
MARIN COUNTY PROBATION Michael Daly, Chief Probation Officer.
Improving Outcomes for Young Adults in the Justice System Challenges and Opportunities.
Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Initiative (MPRI) Creating safer neighborhoods and better citizens.
 As of July 1, 2014, 61 operational courts: › 28 Adult Drug Courts  5 Hybrid Drug/OWI Courts › 14 OWI Courts › 9 Veterans Treatment Courts › 4 Mental.
Yolo County AB 109 Realignment Public Planning Winters April 9 th, 2014 Yolo County Board of Supervisors And Community Corrections Partnership.
 The CARE Program (CARE)— is an offender reentry program utilizing best practices in the prisoner reentry field, including comprehensive case management,
Unit 8 Prof. Hulvat CJ240. Housekeeping…. We are winding down…. We are winding down…. Late work…. Late work…. Coming up in our final unit 9 Coming up.
Department of Corrections Joint Judiciary Hearing July 25, 2013.
Sex Offender Reentry Amy Bess Offender Rehabilitation – Spring 2015.
Yolo County AB 109 Realignment Public Planning Davis April 8 th, 2014 Yolo County Board of Supervisors And Community Corrections Partnership.
Juvenile Reentry Programs Palm Beach County
Intercept 5 Community Supervision
Transition from Prison to Community: the German Case
10 Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections.
Chapter 8 Parole: Early Release and Reentry
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS
Chapter 4 Probation: How Most Offenders Are Punished
24-hours a day 7-days a week 365 days per year
Marie Crosson, Executive Director
10 Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections.
Marion County Re-Entry Coalition Presentation to CWF coaches
Presentation transcript:

Transition from Prison to the Community/Transition Model Initiative ARC Presentation May 14, 2015 Presenters: Dan Chesnut, DOC Gordon Swensen, USOR

Presenters: Dan Chesnut- Assistant Regional Administrator/Region 3 Director- Bonneville Utah Department of Corrections (UDC) Gordon Swensen, Director of Strategic Alliances and Initiatives Utah State Office of Rehabilitation (USOR)

Scope and Nature of Transition 698,000 in 2005 from prison to the community. Projected that 67% will be re-arrested. 46.9% will be convicted of a crime. 51.8% will be returned to prison. In 2008 Pew Center reported 1 in 100 adults was behind bars. Total state expenditure is $52 billion(April 2011) – 2007 Utah’s recidivism rate was 53.7%

Successful Offender Transition as a Public Safety Issue Successful transition promotes public safety. Changing expectation for correctional agencies. No longer just housing “inmates.”

Outcomes of Successful Transition Equipping offenders during and after incarceration for law-abiding release. Fewer victims Lower correctional costs Healthier communities

Traditional Roles Correctional systems are fragmented: Separate areas of expertise Information sharing Custody staff are focused on institutional practice Community supervision is focused on post release

Barriers to Transition for Offenders Up to 1/3 of adult offenders have a diagnosable mental illness and don’t receive services. Up to 75% of adult offenders have substance abuse problems, but only 10% receive treatment. 60 – 75% with mental disorders have co-occurring issues.

Barriers to Transition for Offenders 40 % of released offenders do not have a GED or diploma. Only 1/3 of inmates receive vocational training while incarcerated. 55% of inmates have children under the age of 18.

Strategic Partnerships Common interests among agencies because of shared clients. Collaboration Importance of joint planning. Resource sharing

Historical Context Early 20 th century focused on re-habilitation. By the 70’s faith in re-habilitation was diminishing. Studies concluded “nothing worked.” Crime rates began to rise The public began to demand tougher sentencing. Determinate sentencing – 1990’s

Historical Context cont’ Build larger prisons Re-habilitation was not emphasized. Community corrections also focused on monitoring and enforcement. ISP caseloads

New Century (2000) Increase in offenders being released Higher proportion being returned to prison Rising correctional budgets brought focus to transition Research shows that EBP in transition are successful NIC creates the TPC model

Goals of the TPC model Assist jurisdictions to make systemic change: “Reduce recidivism among transitioning offenders.” “Reduce future victimization.” “Enhance public safety.” “Improve the lives of communities, victims, and offenders.”

Utah TMI Model Goal The overarching goals of the TMI are for all criminal justice involved clients/offenders, county, state or federal from intake through release to remain arrest free over the long haul, and to become competent and self- sufficient members of their community.

Utah TMI Objectives To promote public safety by reducing the threat of harm to persons and their property by released offenders in the communities to which they return. To increase the success rates of offenders who transition from prison by fostering: Effective Risk Management and Treatment Programming Offender Accountability Community Participation

Challenges for Transition Lack of focus on offender success as a desired outcome. Lack of consensus that transition should begin at admission to prison and extend through dis-charge. Extreme fragmentation within agencies managing transition. Lack of empirically based assessments at appropriate times in process. Lack of offender programs/interventions

Premises of TMI Corrections, law enforcement, human service agencies and community partners are stakeholders in the transition process. Stakeholders should share information. Transition should be built upon evidence-based best practices. Transition reform should be affordable, transferable, and adaptable. Transition practice should apply to all imprisoned offenders. Allocation of resources for programming, supervision and services will vary with level of risk posed.

Four Transition Authorities Corrections Authority (DIO, IPD and UCI) Supervision Authority (AP & P) Allied Agencies (VR, DWS, Housing, Health, Education, etc.) Community Partners (faith-based, private nonprofit, volunteers, etc.)

A Greater Vision Through TMI “Over the long haul, these partnerships will build broader political support for transition reform by engaging state and local officials, agency leaders, community leaders, crime victims, faith-based and non- profit organizations, and offenders and their families.” (From TPC Reentry Handbook, NIC)

Elements of the Transition Process A. Assessment and Classification Classification and reclassification Case planning and management Release decision making Community supervision and services Revocation decision making Discharge from supervision or sentence

Three Principles Within TMI Model The Risk Principle: (predictability factors): Age at first conviction Number of prior convictions Prior behavior during confinement Severity of prior criminal convictions History of childhood abuse and neglect History of substance abuse History of education, employment, family and social failures

TMI Principles (Continued) The Need Principle: (Effective treatment leads to lowered recidivism). Risk Factors Include: Anti-social attitudes, values and beliefs Anti-social peers and associations Substance abuse Educational deficiencies Mental health problems Life skills and social skill deficiencies Characterological defects (anger, aggression, impulsivity, etc.)

TMI Principles (Continued) The Responsivity Principle: (The delivery of treatment programs are based on identified risk factors and the individual offender’s: Learning abilities and style Motivation to change Personality type Level of interpersonal and communication skills

Elements of Transition Process (Continued) B. The Transition Accountability Plan (TAP)- Based on the following concerns:  Accountability  Public Safety  Restoration/Restitution  Treatment  Success

The TAP Process Starts During an Offender’s Classification and Admission to Prison Until Discharge in the Community TAP Defines the Programs or Interventions Needed to Modify Risk Factors of the Offender Sensitivity to Public Safety Requirements and Availability of Services Appropriate Partners Participate in the Development and Implementation of the TAP Each TAP Defines Responsibilities of All Stakeholders (including Offenders) TAP Becomes a Long-term Road Map for Services and Activities A Case Management Process Used to Arrange, Advocate, Coordinate, and Monitor Services for Each Offender

The TAP Process (continued) Each TAP Defines Responsibilities of All Stakeholders (including Offenders) TAP Becomes a Long-term Road Map for Services and Activities A Case Management Process Used to Arrange, Advocate, Coordinate, and Monitor Services for Each Offender

Four Phases of Offender Movement Institutional Phase The Reentry Phase The Community Phase The Discharge Phase

Elements of the TAP Process (Continued) C. Release D. Supervision and Services E. Responses to Adjustment and Achievements on Supervision F. Discharge from Supervision G. Aftercare and Community Services

Implementing the TMI Partnerships: Identify stakeholder’s common and specific interests Articulate a common vision for transition Identify problems with existing policies and practices that need correction Plan improvements and monitor implementation Regular and continuing communication among stakeholders Implement policies and procedures that expedite information flow and minimize barriers for offenders

Oversight of the TMI Model in Utah Executive Group Transition Model Committees

Dan Chesnut – Utah Department of Corrections Gordon Swensen - Utah State Office of Rehabilitation Allison Ashment – Federal Defenders Office Larry Bussio – Utah Department of Corrections Jared Beers – Utah Department of Corrections Steve Gehrke- Utah Department of Corrections TMI Leadership Team Members

TMI Committees Community Support Network Education and Employment Federal Probation Housing Mental Health

TMI Committees (continued) Multi-Cultural Groups Policy Implementation and Reform Restorative Justice Substance Abuse Treatment Program Transition

TMI Committees (continued) Sex Offender Transition Treatment Resource Centers Transition Assessment UDC Probation Volunteer Support

Final Thoughts and Questions