1. Exploring the Past Improving the Future
Ed Latessa
Mike Randle
Brian Lovins

2. From the Field THE PAST Hit or miss programs
1972 ODRC stand alone cabinet agency
1979 Ohio Community Corrections Act
1981 CBCF legislation
Prison pop. 17, ,000
80’s and 90’s Ohio doubled the number of prisons it operated
Significant number of “home” grown programs designed and implemented to address “needs” of the clients
Staff personally invested in programs
Focused on “What Felt Right”
Driven by perceptions of doing good versus data

3. Risk, Need, and Responsivity Before RNR
THE PAST
Risk, Need, and Responsivity Before RNR
Risk
Focused primarily on seriousness of offense
Professional judgment
Need
Identified client needs through psychosocial assessments
Focused on a range of factors, some not criminogenic
Responsivity
One size fits all approach
Age
How many priors
What the prior offenses were
Increasing numbers of offenders – get as many as possible some kind of programing
Limited recourses to do it.

4. Nothing Works THE PAST Punishment focused interventions
“Get Tough” policies
Default social service agency
Prison populations increase, less trust in treatment and community corrections

5. Prison Populations Increase
THE PAST
Prison Populations Increase

6. Juvenile Justice Approaches
THE PAST
Juvenile Justice Approaches
Started with the Best Interest of the Youth
Philosophies began to change
Accountability
Victim’s Rights
Punishment
Incapacitation
Get tough on crime mirrors adult population
Mandatory minimums
Bind over process

7. THE PAST
RECLAIM Began
Targeted RECLAIM Began
TR was Expanded

8. DYS Population THE PAST
Average Daily Facility Population (Calendar Year)
2015 (to date)

9. Started with Risk, Need, and Responsivity
THE PRESENT
Started with Risk, Need, and Responsivity
NIC began promoting the Wisconsin Risk Need Assessment as a model
Researcher began challenging the “nothing works” doctrine and Canadian formulated the Risk, Need, Responsivity (RNR) theory
Alternatives to incarceration began emerging
Ohio expanded CBCFs, CCFS, CCA funding and started RECLAIM Ohio
Saw the beginning of drug courts

10. Started with Risk, Need, and Responsivity
THE PRESENT
Started with Risk, Need, and Responsivity
Implementation of risk assessment
Improved knowledge and skills to improve outcomes
Changed focus to helping profession from focusing on compliance only
Increased options for continuum of sanctions available to Judges

11. Started with Risk, Need, and Responsivity
THE PRESENT
Started with Risk, Need, and Responsivity
2001 Study of Ohio’s Drug Court
2002 Study of Ohio HWHs and CBCFs
2005 Study of CCA programs
2005 Study of RECLAIM
2010 Study HWH and CBCF study
2013 Study of RECLAIM
2013 and 2014 Dosage Studies
2015 Study of Prison Programs

12. Research in Ohio THE PRESNET Expansion of RECLAIM
Targeted RECLAIM and Competitive RECLAIM
Improved Offender Assessment
Focus on Higher Risk Offenders
ORAS and OYAS
Improve program assessment
Redesign of CCFs and CBCFs
Correctional Program Checklists (Groups, Drug Courts, Community Supervision Agencies
Development of a new supervision model
EPICS

13. Research in Ohio THE PRESENT Offenders Seeking Employment
Development of new CBT curricula: Cognitive Behavioral Interventions:
Offenders Seeking Employment
Substance Abuse
Sex Offenders
A comprehensive curriculum. Adaptable for MDOs

14. From the Field THE PRESENT
Correctional practitioners receive mixed messages because not all are fully bought in
Correctional practitioners are in transition
New skill sets
More complex tasks
Focused on changing behavior versus observing/reporting
Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions = Flavor of the month?
Risk assessment reduces discretion

15. Challenges for the Field
THE PRESENT
Challenges for the Field
Prison population continues to increase
Despite increased allocation of resources
As prison crowding increases, incidents
Higher expectations
EBP, CCP, EPICS, Structured skill building, Coaching, CQI, BMS, audits, CPC accreditation, recidivism reduction
Opiate and other new drugs – UDS detection problems
Staffing, - training requirements, millennials
Public perception
Unrealistic expectations?
Ohio recodification committee

16. Broader Picture of Community Corrections
THE FUTURE
Broader Picture of Community Corrections
Community Corrections agencies solidify their role as agents of change
Recognize that we cannot punish our way out of crime
Correctional practitioners are university trained in change techniques
Technology is integrated into the daily work to improve efficiency and effectiveness while reducing expectations
Assessment and intervention continue to improve with more effective monitoring and evaluation

17. Where are we headed THE FUTURE New Deliver Models New Focus on Quality
Virtual
New Focus on Quality
Improvement of coaching
New program assessments
Improved QA processes
New Focus on Social Networks
Effective Practices for Community Support for Influencers (EPICS-I)
New CBT Material
POs
Offenders
Programs
Data Analytics