Missouri Re-Entry Program Analysis of offender release factors from 2005 to 2011 and selected demographics Boone County 2007 - 2011 Prepared for Boone.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ex-Offenders and Housing
Advertisements

Oklahoma Department of Corrections DUI Offender Profile
Issues Faced by Juveniles Leaving Custody: Breaking Down the Barriers University of Oregon April 6, 2007 Pat Arthur, National Center for Youth Law.
The Catalyst Group, LLC Adolescent Residential Treatment Initiative I Mua Mau Ohana Project Preliminary Findings Richard Kim, Ph.D. 03/03/2005 Funded by.
" 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
Strengthening Probation as the Sanction of Choice In order for Probation to be a meaningful sanction, it must be adequately funded. Probation is the sanction.
BJS CORRECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
SMART JUSTICE SYMPOSIUM Lt. Joanne Lake Spokane County Sheriff’s Office Detention Services Assistant Facility Commander-Geiger.
DRAFT PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF CORRECTIONS Mark Rubin – Muskie School of Public Service, University of Southern Maine.
Hamilton County Veterans’ Treatment Court Structure, Process, and Purpose.
Figure 7.1 Classifications in the Household Survey.
Mandatory Transfer to Superior Court 13 through 15 years old Class A felony offense 2 juveniles in FY 2004/05.
DOC REENTRY SERVICES TEAM Reentry Services Director Gary Johnson Reentry Program Manager Tim Lanz Community Reentry Coordinator Farris Bell Facilities.
Percentage with COMPAS Percentage of Parolees with Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) that have Medium-High.
Denise Biron Julie Chavez Dara Robichaux.  Who are we? Denise Biron, Psy.D., Norfolk Department of Human Services, Julie Chavez, PO Senior at Norfolk.
Second Chances: Housing and Services for Re-entering Prisoners National Alliance to End Homelessness Annual Conference Nikki Delgado Program Manager Corporation.
Liza Conyers, Ph. D Penn State University (814) Gender, Race, Poverty and HIV.
Reentry Services Project Shelley Ford, MN Department of Corrections Sally Dandurand, Reentry Services Project June 2008, Connecting Youth to Success 1.
BY: ABBY SWANSON CRIMINOLOGY 516 Corrections in Virginia.
DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE: WHAT WE DO AND HOW WE’RE DOING. March 10, 2014 Anchorage Youth Development Coalition JPO Lee Post.
JFA Associates/The Institute, Washington, DC/Austin, Texas Risk Assessment Facts, Myths and Trends James Austin, Ph.D
Ebony S. McDonald, MSW, LSW, MBA p VISN 4 HCRV Specialist Lebanon VA Medical Center.
Overview of Adult Community Corrections. Outline Organizational Structure Organizational Structure Probation population breakdown Probation population.
Department of Corrections Deputy Secretary Deirdre A. Morgan December 6, 2013.
Table 1 Introduction  Overview  While predictors of recidivism and technical violations are often examined in probation and parole outcome research,
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.
By Jacqueline Gallegos ……to  Chaired by Judge Wells  Invited Executive Level Management  Working toward Local Implementation ◦ Local government.
Offender Supervision Control and Public Safety Issues.
Community Corrections Statewide Training Conference October 31, 2013 Kim English Linda Harrison Christine Adams Peg Flick Office of Research and Statistics,
Criminal Justice Reform in California Challenges and Opportunities Mia Bird Northern California Grantmakers Annual Conference – From Ideas to Action May.
Juvenile Crime Prevention Evaluation Phase 2 Interim Report Findings in Brief Juvenile Crime Prevention Evaluation Phase 2 Interim Report Findings in Brief.
Housing: A Significant Reentry Barrier Nicole E. Sullivan NC Department of Correction Office of Research and Planning.
A Follow-up of An Analysis of the New Mexico Screening and Tracking Data for DWI Offenders Judith S. Harmon, MA New Mexico Department of Health Office.
Michigan Department of Corrections Institutional and Community Corrections.
Changing the Status Quo for Status Offenders: New York State’s Efforts to Help Troubled Teens Michael Lens, Vera Institute of Justice Annie Salsich, Vera.
UCLA’s Statewide Evaluation of Proposition 36 Darren Urada, Ph.D. UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs Association for Criminal Justice Research (California)
Sangamon County Action Team Sara Sanders Christy Cunningham Chrissy Gosteli.
Classification and Supervision in Probation and Parole
Recovery Support Services and Client Outcomes: What do the Data Tell Us? Recovery Community Services Program Grantee Meeting December 14, 2007.
Evidence-Based Reentry Practices in a Jail Setting
North Carolina TASC NC TASC Bridging Systems for Effective Offender Care Management.
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT 1. 6-Month Preliminary Evaluation Report Post Release Community Supervision Offenders ▫From October 2011.
Broward Sheriff’s Office Department of Detention and Community Control In-Custody Behavioral Services Division Presentation for the Florida Partners in.
Introduction Results and Conclusions On demographic variables, analyses revealed that ATR clients were more likely to be Hispanic and employed, whereas.
Assessing Housing Barriers Donna Harrison Community Placement Coordinator Virginia Department of Corrections Welcome Home: Addressing Today’s Challenges.
Public Safety and Offender Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007 (AB 900) Implementation and Impact on County Mental Health Robin Dezember Chief Deputy Secretary.
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.
Substance Use among Older Adults (Age 50+): Current Prevalence and Future Expectations Presented by Joe Gfroerer U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.
Ready (or not) to graduate: Mental and physical health characteristics associated with completing public housing-based, substance abuse treatment in Key.
Women in Oregon’s Criminal Justice System Women in Prison Conference November 7, 2015 Executive Director Mike Schmidt Oregon Criminal Justice Commission.
Cleveland Municipal Drug Court: SAMHSA CSAT Adult Treatment Drug Court Grant Dr. Margaret Baughman Madison Wheeler, BS Paul Tuschman, BA Begun.
BJS ReEntry Highlights (note: yearend 2002). BJS ReEntry At least 95% of all State prisoners will be released from prison at some point; nearly 80%
Background Objectives Methods Study Design A program evaluation of WIHD AfterCare families utilizing data collected from self-report measures and demographic.
BackgroundBackground ObjectivesObjectives MethodsMethods Study Design 1E-06 One of the biggest challenges for the Child Welfare System is sustaining successful.
Department of Corrections Joint Judiciary Hearing July 25, 2013.
1 CLEAN COURT OUTCOME STUDY January, 2005 Charlene Rhyne, PhD.
 High Needs Population  Few Resources  Programming is in High Demand.
International Legislators Forum: Minnesota Criminal Justice Issues
An Examination of AB109 Recidivism In San Joaquin County In Year 4
Women in Oregon’s Criminal Justice System
African American.
Adult Facilities Minimum Security (Level 1)
Recidivism Among DWI Offenders in New Mexico (Preliminary Results)
Presentation transcript:

Missouri Re-Entry Program Analysis of offender release factors from 2005 to 2011 and selected demographics Boone County Prepared for Boone County Offender Transition Network Art Schneider Human Development/Family Studies Specialist University of Missouri

The report analyzes : Nine Factors that have a significant impact on reducing recidivism Seven demographic characteristics of those released

Nine Factors that have a significant impact on reducing recidivism in Missouri

Offenders with and without a high school diploma or GED Statewide for OFFENDERS RELEASED 40,556 High School/GED 26,115 No GED Total % % % Difference Recidivism

Offenders with and without a high school diploma or GED Boone County for Boone County Offenders released: 956 with H.S. GED 590 without H.S. GED 1,546 Total

Vocational Skills –Offenders released as skilled, unskilled Statewide for Skilled as measured by a score of 1 or 2 on DOC vocational classification: Vocationally trained or skilled with a stable employment history Offenders Released: 31,613 Skilled (V1-V2) 35,058 Unskilled V3-V Total % Difference Recidivism

Vocational Skills –Offenders released as skilled, unskilled Boone County for Boone County Offenders released 684 skilled 862 unskilled 1,246 Total

Offenders who completed or did not complete Core Re-entry Program Statewide for Offenders Released 12,390 Completed 103,588 Did not complete % Difference recidivism

Offenders who completed or did not complete Core Re-entry Program Boone County for Boone County Offenders Released 231 Completed Did not complete Total

Offenders with and without mental illness Statewide for Offenders released 54,700 Healthy/Minor Impairment 11,971 Mentally Ill % Difference recidivism

Offenders with and without mental illness Boone County for Boone County offenders released 1,287 Not Mentally Ill 259 Mentally ill

Offenders with and without substance abuse Statewide for Measured by DOC SACA (Substance Abuse Classification Instrument). A score of 3 to 5 indicates the offender requires either a community or institutional drug treatment program. Offenders released 7,473 No abuse 11,419 Occasional abuse 111,902 Substance abuse % Difference recidivism

Offenders with and without substance abuse Boone County for Boone County offenders released 230 No substance abuse 1,316 Substance abuse

Offenders successfully completing a 4 month, 6 month or 12 month drug institutional treatment program. Statewide for % Difference recidivism Offenders released 30,712 Institutional Treatment 67,578 No institutional treatment

Offenders successfully completing a 4 month, 6 month or 12 month drug institutional treatment program. Boone County for Boone County Offenders released 243 Treatment Program 550 No treatment or failed program

Offenders Full-time employed, part-time, unemployed Statewide for % Difference recidivism Offenders released 2,495 Employed full-time 13,715 Employed Part-time Unemployed

All Released 6 months12 months2 years3 years Full-time Part-time Unemployed Total Diff in recidivism Offenders Full-time employed, part-time, unemployed Statewide for Generated below state numbers from the state percentages.

Offenders Full-time employed, part-time, unemployed Boone County for Boone County offenders released 404 Employed 1145 Unemployed

Offenders who avoid or do not avoid drug or alcohol use while under supervision Statewide for % Difference recidivism Offenders released 51,272 No substance abuse 4,130 Substance abuse last six months 5,726 Active substance abuse

Offenders who avoid or do not avoid drug or alcohol use while under supervision Boone County for Offenders released No abuse 151 Active abuse

Offenders under supervision with social problems requiring intervention of probation and parole officer Statewide for Offenders released 2,486 No social problems 18,637 Social problems last six months 40,004 Active social problems % Difference recidivism Social problems include domestic relations, finance, medical and mental health issues

Offenders under supervision with social problems requiring intervention of probation and parole officer Boone County for Offenders released 813 No social problems 736 Active social problems Social problems include domestic relations, finance, medical and mental health issues

Seven demographic characteristics of Offenders released and supervised by Boone County Probation and Parole

Number of offenders released OFFENDERS RELEASED YEAR NUMBER

2011 Gender and Race of offenders released GENDERNUMBERPERCENTAGE FEMALE % MALE % RACENUMBERPERCENTAGE ASIAN4 0.65% BLACK % HISPANIC % NATIVE AMERICAN % WHITE %

Age of offenders released AGENUMBERPERCENTAGE UNDER % % % % % % % % 3 YEARS 10 YEARS 5 YEARS 4 YEARS

Release by most serious offense NUMBEROFFENSEPERCENTAGE 178DRUGS 28.71% 54DWI 8.71% 255NON-VIOLENT 41.13% 20SEX 3.23% 113VIOLENT 18.23%

Release by high school diploma/GED, trained and skilled, with substance abuse, and mental health OFFENSENUMBERPERCENTAGE WITH GED/HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA % TRAINED AND SKILLED 73 13% SUBSTANCE ABUSE537 87% MENTAL HEALTH98 18%

Status of offenders released RELEASE STATUSNUMBERPERCENTAGE PROBATION % PAROLE % CONDITIONAL RELEASE % DISCHARGE %

Recidivism after two years for state and Cooper County Number of offenders released