Transcript Expert Panel on Adult Offender Reentry and Recidivism

Expert Panel on Adult Offender
Reentry and Recidivism Reduction
Programs
Report to the California State
Legislature: A Roadmap for
Effective Offender Programming
in California
June 30, 2007
Introduction
• Correctional programs reduce recidivism
• California’s adult offender recidivism rate is one
of the highest in the nation
External Factors Preventing
Programming Success
• California’s prisons are dangerously
overcrowded.
• California treats offenders who complete
rehabilitation programs the same way it treats
those who do not.
Dangerous Overcrowding
• The CDCR houses 172,385 prisoners in facilities
designed to hold 100,000.
• The CDCR houses more than 18,000 prisoners
in space designed for programming and other
activities.
Recommendation 1—Reduce overcrowding
in California prison facilities and parole
offices.
Lack of Incentives to Complete
Programs
• California’s correctional culture is oriented more
towards control and punishment, than
rehabilitation.
• California offenders receive few incentives to
participate in rehabilitation programming.
Lack of Incentives to Complete
Programs
Recommendation 2—Enact legislation to
expand California’s system of positive
reinforcements for offenders who
successfully complete their rehabilitation
program requirements, comply with
institutional rules in prison, and fulfill
their parole obligations in the
community.
Part I—The Roadmap
Internal Factors Preventing
Programming Success
• The CDCR does not assign offenders to programs
based on risk-needs assessments.
• The CDCR does not have automated behavior
management (case) plans for each of its offenders.
• The CDCR does not offer a sufficient quantity of
evidence-based rehabilitation programs designed to
reduce recidivism to its adult offenders.
• The CDCR does not always measure the quality or
effectiveness of its adult offender programs.
• The CDCR has begun to focus on offender reentry
issues and initiatives, but it needs to expand those
efforts.
• The CDCR does not have a graduated parole
sanctions policy to provide community-based
alternatives to incarceration for parolees who violate
their parole conditions.
California’s Adult Offender Population
Eight Evidence-Based Principles and
Practices
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Target Highest Risk Offenders.
Assess Offenders Needs.
Design Responsivity into Programming.
Develop Behavior Management Plans.
Deliver Treatment Programs using
Cognitive-Based Strategies.
6. Motivate and Shape Offender Behaviors.
7. Engender the Community as a Protective
Factor Against Recidivism and Use the
Community to Support Offender Reentry
and Reintegration.
8. Identify Outcomes and Measure Progress.
The CDCR does not assign offenders to
programs based on risk-needs assessments.
• The CDCR often assigns offenders to programs
on a first-come, first-served basis, regardless of
risk level.
Recommendation 3—Select and utilize a
risk assessment tool to assess offender
risk to reoffend.
The CDCR does not assign offenders to
programs based on risk-needs assessments.
• The CDCR often assigns offenders to programs
on a first-come, first-served basis, regardless of
needs.
Recommendation 4—Determine offender
rehabilitation treatment programming
based on the results of assessment tools
that identify and measure criminogenic
and other needs.
Seven Criminogenic Needs Areas
1. Educational-vocational-financial deficits
and achievement skills
2. Anti-social attitudes and beliefs
3. Anti-social and pro-criminal associates and
isolation for pro-social others
4. Temperament and impulsiveness (weak
self-control) factors
5. Familial-marital-dysfunctional relationship
(lack of nurturance-caring and-or
monitoring-supervision)
6. Alcohol and other drug disorders
7. Deviant sexual preferences and arousal
The CDCR does not have automated behavior
management (case) plans for each of its
offenders.
• The behavior management plan links the
assessment process to rehabilitation
programming and ensures continuity of
rehabilitation programs and services between
the prison, parole system, and other communitybased providers.
Recommendation 5—Create and monitor a
behavior management plan for each
offender.
The CDCR does not offer a sufficient quantity of
evidence-based rehabilitation programs designed to
reduce recidivism to its adult offenders.
Six Major Offender Program Areas
# of CDCR
Recidivism
Reduction Programs
Academic, Vocational, and Financial
17
Alcohol and Other Drugs
12
Aggression, Hostility, Anger, and Violence
2
Criminal Thinking, Behaviors, and Associations
2
Family, Marital, and Relationships
3
Sex Offending
0
The CDCR does not offer a sufficient quantity of
evidence-based rehabilitation programs designed to
reduce recidivism to its adult offenders.
Recommendation 6—Select and deliver in
prison and in the community a core set of
programs that covers the six major
offender programming areas—(a)
Academic, Vocational, and Financial; (b)
Alcohol and other Drugs; (c)Aggression,
Hostility, Anger, and Violence; (d)
Criminal Thinking, Behaviors, and
Associations; (e) Family, Marital, and
Relationships; and (f) Sex Offending.
The CDCR does not always measure the quality or
effectiveness of its adult offender programs.
• Each program provider and offender participant
should know, before the program begins, what a
successful outcome from participating in the
program would look like and what they need to
do to achieve it.
Recommendation 7—Develop systems and
procedures to collect and utilize
programming process and outcome
measures.
The CDCR has begun to focus on offender reentry issues
and initiatives, but needs to expand those efforts.
• Public safety in our communities is the
responsibility of all citizens.
• Offenders require the assistance of their family
members, friends, local support systems, and
broader communities to sustain the treatment gains
they have achieved through their participation in
correctional programming.
Recommendation 8—Continue to develop and
strengthen the CDCR’s formal partnerships
with community stakeholders.
The CDCR has begun to focus on offender reentry issues
and initiatives, but needs to expand those efforts.
• Offender programming in the community must
include programs designed to continue to reduce
offender risk to reoffend levels, as well as reduce
offender opportunities for committing crimes.
• Parole supervision must include a focus on those
opportunities to commit crimes that exist in
communities.
The CDCR has begun to focus on offender reentry issues
and initiatives, but needs to expand those efforts.
Recommendation 9—Modify programs and
services delivered in the community (parole
supervision and community based programs
and services) to ensure that those services:
(a) target the criminogenic needs areas of
high and moderate risk offenders; (b) assist
all returning offenders maintain their
sobriety, locate housing, and obtain
employment; and (c) identify and reduce the
risk factors within specific neighborhoods
and communities.
The CDCR has begun to focus on offender reentry issues
and initiatives, but needs to expand those efforts.
• States needs to strengthen their communities.
• Communities provide networks of informal social
controls that can prevent offenders from repeating
their criminal behaviors.
Recommendation 10: Develop the community
as a protective factor against continuing
involvement in the criminal justice system
for offenders reentering the community on
parole and-or in other correctional statuses
(e.g., probation, diversion, etc.).
The CDCR does not have a graduated parole sanctions policy to
provide community-based alternatives to incarceration for parolees
who violate their parole conditions.
• The ultimate goal of parole supervision is successful
completion of parole with no new crimes committed.
• Incarceration is a destabilizing factor for the
offender, family, and community, and therefore
even short-term interruptions contribute to more
negative behaviors in the community.
Recommendation 11—Develop structured
guidelines to respond to technical parole
violations based on risk to reoffend level of
the offender and the seriousness of the
violation.
Identified Barriers
• Legislative
• Structural
• Cultural
• Societal (or community)
Expected Positive Outcomes
• Could reduce the number of prison beds
that California needs by 42,000 to 48,000
beds per year.
• Could save California between $561 and
$684 million a year.
Major Implementation Tasks
1. Adopt Expert Panel Plan and
Recommendations
2. Craft and Pass Legislation and Change
Policies to Create Access to and Incentives
for Program Participation
3. Develop or Adopt and Implement Risk to
Reoffend Assessment Instrument
4. Select and Implement Offender Needs
Assessment Instrument
5. Begin Assigning Offenders to Appropriate
Services Based on Risk and Needs
6. Pilot New Programs
Part II—The Program Reviews
The Program Review Process
• Inventoried ALL CDCR adult offender
programs and activities.
• Nominated 34 as recidivism reduction programs
• Reviewed 11 nominated recidivism reduction
programs using the California Program
Assessment Process (CPAP)
11 Programs Reviewed
Program Location
Program Name
Institutional (Prison)
Incarcerated Youthful Offender (IYO)
Substance Abuse Program (SAP)
Family Foundations Program (FFP)
Re-Entry Education
Transitional Case Management Program-Mental
Health Services Continuum (TCMP-MHSCP)
Parole (C0mmunity)
Female Offender Treatment Employment Program
(FOTEP)
Substance Abuse Treatment and Recovery (STAR)
Parolee Employment Program (PEP)
Residential Multi-Service Centers (RMSC)
In-Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICDTP)
Day Reporting Center (DRC)
Effective Interventions Ratings
Research Basis Ratings
CPAP Review Findings
• Most of the programs reviewed contain program
design elements that are in line with “what
works” research for effective adult offender
rehabilitation programming.
• Few of the programs reviewed assigned
offenders to programming based on risks or
needs.
Part III—Next Steps and Conclusion
Next Steps
• Complete CPAP Assessments.
• Focus on Academic Programming.
• Develop Benchmarks that Assist with the
Implementation of AB 900.
• Help CDCR Establish “High-Powered”
Implementation Teams.
• Analyze Support Infrastructure.
• Help CDCR Develop Capacity to Perform QA
and Evaluation on a Continuing Basis.
• Assist with Outcome Evaluation of Spending
of $54 Million Reentry Initiatives Budget.
Next Steps
• Refine Population Projections and Financial
Estimates.
• Assist with the Development of RFPs for Future
Research Studies.
• Provide Additional Recommendations for
Prisoners with Long Lengths of Stay.
• Provide Additional Recommendations for
Parolees Reentering their Communities.
• Produce a Detailed Implementation Plan that
Operationalizes Our Recommendations.
Conclusion
• Improve California’s adult prisoner and
parolee rehabilitation programming.
• Reduce California’s recidivism rate.
• The CDCR will be more transparent and
accountable for a mission that is in line with
the public’s expectations.
• A significantly larger number of the several
hundreds of thousands of prisoners who
enter California prisons will return to their
communities better prepared to be law
abiding citizens.