Transcript National Best Practices for Local Reentry Councils HOUSING

CAROLINA JUSTICE POLICY CENTER
Community Services Conference
Chapel Hill, NC - May 16, 2014
Dennis Schrantz
Center for Justice Innovation
Michigan Council on Crime and Delinquency
www.miccd.org
1
GOAL
To facilitate access to stable housing upon reentry into the community so that no returning
citizen is released to homelessness
Reference:
Report of the ReEntry Policy Council
Housing – Pages 256-281
2



Facility staff, parole staff and community-based transition
planners work with prisoners to assess individual housing
needs and identify the appropriate housing option for each
incarcerated individual well in advance of release.
The housing planning process includes an assessment of the
feasibility, safety, and appropriateness of an individual living
with family members after his or her release from prison.
A full range of housing options (i.e. supportive housing,
transitional housing, affordable private rental housing) is
available with adequate capacity to accommodate the number
of individuals returning to the community.
3



Individuals leaving prison who have histories of
homelessness are included among the homeless priority
population, in order to facilitate their access to supportive
housing.
Prisoners receive information and training on strategies for
finding/maintaining housing and their legal rights as
tenants.
Individuals who are entering the private rental market—
and who demonstrate that they are without adequate
resources to pay rent— are provided small stipends and/or
housing assistance for the period immediately after
release.
4



Individuals leaving prison immediately enter an
appropriate housing option in the community.
Transition planners, working with communitybased organizations, are familiar with the full
range of housing options available in each
community and maintain lists or inventories of
available housing.
Family violence risks are recognized/addressed
in the housing plan when risk to the family or
partner is an issue.
5

Lack of safe, affordable, long-term housing options like supportive housing

For sexual offenders, restrictions due to “proximity laws”

Denial of rental applications due to: criminal history, bad/lack of credit

Long waiting lists for public housing due to inadequate state/federal funding

Community resistance

Resources to assist with security deposits and/or rent in the private market

Lack of state and federally funded low-income housing vouchers

Misinterpretation for exclusions in federal housing regulations or local practices
6
Research on the best practices for housing options for
returning prisoners is still in its infancy but the
literature identifies several promising approaches*:

Familial households

Private-market housing

Federally subsidized housing

Service-enhanced transitional and permanent supportive
housing

Community corrections centers
*Lake, 1993; HUD, 1997; LaVigne et al., 2003; Visher et al., 2004; Roman and Travis, 2004
7
For 10% to 20% of returning prisoners, living with their family is not an option
due family conflict, limited resources, legal restrictions, and/or history of
violent or sexual misconduct.*
49% to 62% of returning citizens stay with family member or friends upon
release and for about two months.
This can be encouraged by working with family members while the returning
citizen is still in prison to plan for this eventually and the conditions that could
make it work:



Implement family support and reunification services that provide pre-release counseling
and support for prisoners and families.
Start with an assessment by a licensed family therapist and provide support/guidance
from partnering community providers to assist.
Identify Family Advocates to meet with the prisoner’s family to address issues that
prevent the family from reuniting with the returning prisoner.
8



Create a network of local providers that can assist the family in meeting their
needs through a wide variety of services (utility assistance, emergency rent
vouchers, counseling) and accompany the family on visits to the prison to
begin working on reunification.
In cases where the family is uncomfortable with reunification until the
prisoner has returned and has shown a commitment to living a responsible,
crime-free life, the Family Advocate can continue to coordinate supportive
services with the family and proceed with the reunification process when
everyone involved is ready.
Although the primary focus of this program is on the health, safety, and
well-being of the families, a healthy family with access to needed support
services is a valuable housing option for returning prisoners.
9
Renting or purchasing is an option, but few returning prisoners have adequate
resources to do so*. Many urban areas are witnessing increasingly tight rental
markets, with a severely limited number of units available for low-income
households, particularly in neighborhoods accessible by public
transportation**
A similar problem exists in rural areas where the distance to employment and
other services is often greater and the public transportation options are fewer.
Landlords may view all individuals with criminal records as a threat to safety
without considering individual circumstances. Criminal background checks are
allowed by most states and are standard practice by many landlords.
Sex offenders are subject to legal restrictions that limit where they can live.
Sex offender registries are easily accessible to landlords, who are often fearful
of renting to sex offenders regardless of individual circumstances.
*A 2004 study by the National Low-Income Housing Coalition reported that, on average, a full-time worker needed
to earn $15.37 per hour ($31,970 annually) in order to afford the rent for a modest two-bedroom home while
paying no more than 30 percent of income for housing. Based on this estimate, those working for minimum wage
must work at least 80 hours per week to afford the same apartment.
**National Low-Income Housing Coalition 2004; Obrinsky and Meron 2002.
10
Many community-based reentry sites are providing rental assistance
designed to help parolees—who do not yet have an income—access
housing in the private market such as using federal, state or local
funding to help pay rent on a time-limited basis for parolees who are
in need of housing, are at high or moderately high risk to re-offend,
and are ineligible for other existing resources.

To make this approach work, collaborating with housing assistance
providers ensures that parolees are accessing available assets.

Communities maintain a current housing inventory to assist parolees
in quickly locating appropriate housing options.

Public outreach and education is used to hear the concerns of local
residents and dispel some of the fears around parolees living in the
community resulting in increased community support of the re-entry
housing efforts.
11
For many returning prisoners, neither familial nor private-market
options are realistic. Without a family willing to take them in or the
money available for rent, many turn to federally subsidized
housing programs as a viable option before homelessness.*
Public housing waiting lists for individuals and families are typically
long, with families with children getting first consideration.**
Compounding the issues of availability is eligibility, both for public
housing and for vouchers. From a financial perspective, many PHAs
ask for proof of income to be eligible for Section 8 housing
vouchers, a task difficult for those just leaving prison.
Federally subsidized options include public housing and the Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP). Nationally,
there are approximately 1.3 million households living in public housing units, owned, managed, and operated by
3,300 Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) (see: http://www.hud.gov/renting/phprog.cfm).
According to the National Low-Income Housing Coalition, between 1996 and 1998, a family’s average time on a
waiting list for public housing rose from 22 months to 33 months, a 50 percent increase. In some large cities, the
waiting period is substantially longer.
12
But there are exceptions – and sometimes the only choice
is to work through the process. Having a positive working
relationship with the state housing authority – usually
developed at the state level by state leaders – makes this
more fruitful:
1.
An evicted person successfully completes a
rehabilitation program.
2.
The circumstances leading to the eviction no longer
exist.
3.
The person is no longer illegally using drugs or
abusing alcohol and is participating in or has
successfully completed a rehabilitation program or
has otherwise been rehabilitated successfully.
13
Community corrections centers, also known as halfway houses or community
re-entry centers, provide a “halfway” step between prison and independent
living. These facilities are overseen by either corrections or community
corrections agencies
Eligibility varies by state and offense, some inmates are eligible for release into
a transitional program for the last 90 to 120 days of their sentence, to serve
several purposes.

To provide a structured and regulated environment for high- risk parolees
who may not be ready to go straight from prison to living independently in
the community.

To increase public safety by closely monitoring residents’ activity.

To offer supportive services and case managers to broker employment and
social services in the community.

To support work outside of the facility to promote community reintegration
while maintaining intensive supervision and coordinating service delivery.
14
Combining housing services with additional support services
has shown success in helping returning prisoners with very few
resources achieve success using two basic models, serviceenhanced transitional housing and supportive housing.


Service-enhanced housing includes transitional (i.e., fixed length of
stay) or phased-permanent housing (a new housing model where
residents have month-to-month occupancy agreements in lieu of
leases) coupled with a variety of support services to assist clients in
achieving self-sufficiency.
Supportive housing is designed to provide permanent housing,
where social service provision is an integral component of the
housing operation.
15
Supportive or service-enhanced housing programs offer a range
of services in addition to housing:*


One of the major and often insurmountable barriers to this type of housing is
community opposition to the development or expansion of supportive or
transitional housing so public education is needed.
This opposition appears to be motivated by fear of increased levels of crime,
noise, and traffic, as well as a fear of decreased property value, despite
current research that does not support many of these common fears.**
*Service may include: family counseling, case management, medical services, substance abuse counseling, social
skills development, anger management, vocational training, and/or assistance with obtaining vital documents such
as Social Security cards and birth certificates. Some jurisdictions have used these programs specifically to target
returning prisoners or ex-offenders but the majority serve these populations simply because they are homeless or
at risk of becoming homeless (Roman et al., 2006).
**For instance, research has shown that the general impact of Section 8 occupancy and supportive housing appears
to positively impact property values (Galster et al., 1999). In addition, research shows that if negative impacts do
occur, it is most likely because these facilities are forced into already troubled areas, providing more potential
victims to criminals already active in the area (Goetz et al., 1996; Galster et al., 2002).
16
Some community reentry sites have built successful relationships with
existing supportive-housing providers.
In some communities where the traditional approach to supportive
housing is not currently an option, sites are combining supportive
services with other housing options, such as private-market options.


For example, in a three county region in Michigan (Muskegon-OttawaOceana), the LRC has designed a process through which a Housing
Specialist assists parolees who are ineligible for existing services find
suitable housing in the private market. The site then provides rental
assistance to bridge the gap until an individual secures employment.
Once the returning prisoner is housed, the Housing Specialist continues
to work with the individual, parole agent, and transition team to
coordinate a wide array of services to support housing stability,
including employment, transportation, and health care services.
17
Bradley, K.H., N.C. Richardson, R.B.M. Oliver, and E.M. Slayter. (2001). No Place
Like Home: Housing and the Ex-Prisoner. Boston, MA: Community Resources
for Justice.
Gilbert, P. (May 2004). Guide for Developing Housing for Ex-Offenders. US Dept
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Community Capacity Development Office.
NCJ 203374.
Kirk, T.A. (April 2007). Supportive Housing, Better Care, Batter Value.
Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services.
http://www.ct.gov/dmhas/site/default.asp
Petersilia, J. 2000. “Prisoners Returning to Communities: Political, Economic,
and Social Consequences.” In Sentencing and Corrections: Issues for the 21st
Century. National Institute of Justice: Papers from the Executive Sessions on
Sentencing and Corrections. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, May.
18
Petersilia, J. 2003. When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry.
Oxford, UK: Ox-ford University Press.
Taxman, F. S., Young, D., Byrne, J. M., Holsinger, A., & Anspach, D. (October
2002).
From Prison Safety to Public Safety: Innovations in Offender Reentry.
Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Travis, J., A. Solomon, & M. Waul. (June 2001). From Prison to Home: The
Dimensions and Consequences of Prisoner Reentry. Washington, DC: The Urban
Institute, Justice
Policy Center.
19