Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:41 am
Time: 11:41 am
Results for community-based corrections
58 results foundAuthor: U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Title: Guidelines for Community Supervision of DWI offenders Summary: The guidelines presented in this document are intended to provide a framework for developing, implementing and operating effective programs for the community supervision of DWI offenders. These strategies are recommended to achieve the best possible outcomes and to provide a structure from which to build a solid approach and direction to ensure long-term public safety by reducing recidivism through offender behavioral change. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2008. 96p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117803 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsDrugged DrivingDrunk DrivingProbation |
Author: Villanueva, Chandra Kring Title: Mothers, Infants and Imprisonment: A National Look at Prison Nurseries and Community-Based Alternatives Summary: This is the first U.S. national report on prison nursery programs. The report examines the expansion of prison nursery programs across the U.S. These programs allow incarcerated women to keep their newborns with them in prison for a finite period of time. The report also looks at community-based residential parenting programs, which allow women to serve criminal justice sentences with their infants in a non-prison setting. The report finds that the number of prison-based nursery programs is growing, but such programs are still relatively rare. Though every state has seen a dramatic rise in its women’s prison population over the past three decades, only nine states have prison nursery programs in operation or under development. Of the nine prison nursery programs existing or in development, four were created within the last five years. Details: New York: Women's Prison Association, Institute on Women and Criminal Justice, 2009. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 1, 2010 at: http://www.wpaonline.org/pdf/Mothers%20Infants%20and%20Imprisonment%202009.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.wpaonline.org/pdf/Mothers%20Infants%20and%20Imprisonment%202009.pdf Shelf Number: 119685 Keywords: Children of PrisonersCommunity-based CorrectionsFemale InmatesPrison Nurseries |
Author: Richards, Patsy Title: Summary Justice Reform: Evaluation of Fiscal Work Order Pilots Summary: Fiscal Work Orders ( FWOs), introduced under Summary Justice Reform ( SJR) are the first community-based (unpaid work) disposals that can be issued by procurators fiscal in Scotland, as an alternative to prosecution in the courts. The disposal was also introduced as an alternative to financial penalties where means to pay was at issue; it was implemented on a pilot basis. This RF sets out findings from the evaluation of the first two years of FWO pilots, in relation to the SJR intended outcome - fewer minor cases going to court unnecessarily and the overarching SJR objective - a summary criminal justice system that is fair, efficient, effiective and quick and simple. This report presents the following findings: 1. In two years the pilots received 608 FWO referrals. The orders were run on an 'opt-in' basis and only two-thirds (422) of those referred attended for assessment. Most (404) who attended assessment were deemed suitable for a FWO, however only 345 people went on to start work placements. The two-thirds attrition rate was mostly due to non-attendance, although 35 people declined to take part. 2. A report for all non-attendance and non-compliance was submitted to fiscals for prosecution, those who declined the offer were also returned and 174 returned cases have been prosecuted to date. Completion rates for those who started an order were very high at 75% (259 orders). Although comparisons are not straightforward completion and non-completion rates compared well to other community-based disposals. 3. The efficiency of the pilots was reduced by low and patchy referral rates. This was attributed to the pilot design where only one fiscal office referred to each pilot; during staff absence or turnover, referrals fell (to zero in one instance before recovering). The target of 100 work orders per pilot per year was not achieved. 4. FWOs were regarded favourably by the majority of professionals and participants. The pilots ran work placements flexibly. Joint working between social work and fiscals was a key outcome. 5. In general FWOs were seen as FAIR, EFFECTIVE, QUICK AND SIMPLE. EFFICIENCY would have been improved had more fiscals been referring to each pilot. In fact as they operated on a fixed funding basis and all pilots said they could have handled more referrals unit costs could have been halved had the target of 100 orders per year been met. Notwithstanding, unit costs were still only half that of (longer and higher tariff) Community Service Orders. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2011. 61p.,; Summary Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 31, 2011 at: Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 120633 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsProsecution, AlternativesUnpaid Work Orders |
Author: Oklahoma. Department of Corrections Title: Effectiveness of Electronic Monitoring and GPS Summary: After over two decades of use and evolution, electronic monitoring (EM) and, increasingly, global positioning satellite systems (GPS) have achieved acceptance within the correctional community and other areas of criminal justice. Evidence indicates that the public will approve of that use when informed and that the sanction has legitimacy with offenders as well. The research literature has not found that EM or GPS has had a positive impact on crime reduction, but their use has not resulted in demonstrably higher crime rates or more recidivism than incarceration or other less-intensive community supervision. Moreover, EM and GPS appear to be cost-effective when not used for “net-widening” and may have beneficial secondary effects beyond crime or recidivism reduction. Studies indicate that this remains true even when specific offense and offender types are considered. Details: Oklahoma City, OK: Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 2010. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: DOC White Paper: Accessed April 27, 2011 at: http://www.doc.state.ok.us/adminservices/ea/GPS%20White%20Paper.doc Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.state.ok.us/adminservices/ea/GPS%20White%20Paper.doc Shelf Number: 121513 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsElectronic MonitoringGlobal Positioning Satellite Systems (GPS) |
Author: Duggan, Erica Title: No Violence Alliance (NoVA) Project: San Francisco’s Model Adult Case Management Reentry Program Summary: This report explores the history of releasing individuals from incarceration and how model reentry programs can assist in the reentry process. The benefits to formerly incarcerated individuals and society are discussed. The report further describes similar qualities between model programs in the United States. Finally, it highlights a San Francisco model reentry project, the No Violence Alliance (NoVA) Project that was initiated by the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department in collaboration with the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ) and other community based organizations. Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2010. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2011 at: http://www.cjcj.org/files/No_Violence_Alliance_Project.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjcj.org/files/No_Violence_Alliance_Project.pdf Shelf Number: 121651 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsParoleesReentryRehabilitation |
Author: Morrish, Dawn Title: A Health Needs Assessment of the Hertfordshire Probation Trust Caseload Summary: There is much literature about the health, particularly mental health of prisoners, but very little about the health needs of offenders in the community. Offender Health Care Strategies concluded that offenders in the community would have similar needs to prisoners, mainly physical health, mental health and substance misuse needs. Whereas, at the end of March 2010 there were 85,184 people (80,894 males and 4,290 females) in custody in England and Wales a rise of 2,200 from March 2009. Amongst the remand population, the largest change since March 2009 by offence group was for drugs offences, which were up by 10%. One of the biggest requirements for community orders and suspended sentence orders from Q4 2008-Q4 2009 was for alcohol treatment, up by 13%. Compared to sentenced offenders there were 241,504 offenders being managed in the community by the National Probation Service as at end December, 2009. For Hertfordshire Probation Trust this figure was 3,487 compared to a prison population of 768 at HMP The Mount, Hertfordshire’s Category C male prison. If offender health is to be effectively addressed, the focus needs to widen to address offender health needs rather than emphasis on health care for prisoners. In the community many offenders seem to have difficulty accessing mainstream health services, and tend to overuse Accident and Emergency centres, but have very little provision of preventive health care or health promotion. The physical and mental health care needs of offenders in the criminal justice system have long been subject to calls for reform. Improving outcomes for this group is important both in terms of re-offending rates and successful rehabilitation. Offenders are subject to considerable health inequalities. They are much more likely to experience mental health problems or have a learning difficulty and are more likely to have problems with drugs and alcohol. Details: Hertfordshire, UK: Hertfordshire Probation Trust and National Health Service Hertfordshire, 2011. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2011 at: http://www.ohrn.nhs.uk/resource/policy/NeedsassessmentHertfordshireProbation.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.ohrn.nhs.uk/resource/policy/NeedsassessmentHertfordshireProbation.pdf Shelf Number: 121693 Keywords: Alcohol AbuseCommunity-based CorrectionsDrug Abuse TreatmentHealth CareMental Health ServicesProbationers (U.K.)RehabilitationSubstance Abuse Treatment |
Author: Disability Rights Texas Title: Thinking Outside the Cell: Alternatives to Incarceration for Youth with Mental Illness Summary: Youth with mental illness can suffer devastating consequences from commitment to juvenile justice facilities, where specialized treatment and supports are often insufficient to meet their rehabilitative needs. Given the prevalence of youth with mental health needs in the Texas juvenile justice system, there is a pressing need for the state to develop appropriate and costeffective alternatives to incarceration for this population. Texas has already started to shift its focus and funding in the right direction — toward community-based supports and services. During the 2009 legislative session, state leadership showed visionary support for community-based programming by reducing funding for the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) by $100 million and providing $45.7 million in new funding to juvenile probation departments for Commitment Reduction Programs intended to divert youth from TYC facilities. Many probation departments across the state used these funds to develop mental health resources, and preliminary data show an excellent return on investment. THINKING OUTSIDE THE CELL: ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION FOR YOUTH WITH MENTAL ILLNESS features three case studies of youth placed in the Corsicana Residential Treatment Center, the TYC facility designated for youth with serious mental illness or emotional disturbance. Their stories highlight the significant challenges youth with mental health needs face before and after commitment to TYC. They also demonstrate that access to appropriate and effective community-based mental health services is key to addressing the underlying sources of many youths’ offenses, reducing recidivism, and preventing deeper penetration into the juvenile and criminal justice systems. This report also features numerous effective community-based intervention strategies currently being implemented in Texas and other jurisdictions to reduce the incidence of youth with mental health needs in the juvenile justice system. As Texas continues to transform its juvenile justice system, such model programs will help ensure better outcomes for youth, families and communities. Finally, the report provides policy recommendations concerning youth with mental illness involved in the juvenile justice system. Details: Oakland, CA: National Center for Youth Law, 2011. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 24, 2011 at: http://www.youthlaw.org/fileadmin/ncyl/youthlaw/publications/NCYL-thinking-outside-the-cell-report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.youthlaw.org/fileadmin/ncyl/youthlaw/publications/NCYL-thinking-outside-the-cell-report.pdf Shelf Number: 121822 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsJuvenile Offenders (Texas)Juvenile ProbationMental Health ServicesMentally Ill Offenders, JuvenilesRehabilitation |
Author: Fratello, Jennifer Title: Juvenile Detention Reform in New York City: Measuring Risk through Research Summary: The January 2006 closure of New York City’s only alternative to juvenile detention brought the city close to a crisis: family court lost its only alternative pretrial supervision option and the population in local detention facilities was at its highest in three years. This situation also presented an opportunity for the city’s juvenile justice system to take stock of how and when it was using detention — equivalent to jail in the adult context — for youth facing delinquency charges. The Office of the Criminal Justice Coordinator in conjunction with a variety of agencies and entities involved with the juvenile justice system seized this occasion to explore new methods for responding to young people awaiting sentencing that would be more effective at producing positive outcomes for youth and enhancing public safety. They embarked upon a two-phase reform process, with assistance from the Vera Institute of Justice. First, they conducted a research study and designed an empirically based risk-assessment instrument (RAI) measuring the likelihood that a youth would fail to appear in court or be rearrested during the pendency of his/her case. The tool would be used to help inform family court judges’ decisions about pretrial detention for juveniles. Second, the group planned a variety of community-based alternatives to detention (ATDs) for young people who did not require secure confinement and could be supervised and better served in their own communities. This report examines the development of both the RAI and the alternatives to detention and presents preliminary outcomes of the reforms. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, Center on Youth Justice, 2011. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 19, 2011 at: http://www.jdaihelpdesk.org/Docs/Documents/RAI%20Report%20Vera.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.jdaihelpdesk.org/Docs/Documents/RAI%20Report%20Vera.pdf Shelf Number: 122116 Keywords: Alternative to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsJuvenile Detention (New York City)Juvenile Justice ReformJuvenile OffendersRisk Assessment, Juveniles |
Author: Rhyne, Charlene Title: Multnomah County Day Reporting Center Evaluation Summary: In January 1994 Multnomah County Department of Community Justice celebrated the opening of the Day Reporting Center (DRC). The DRC is a highly structured programming opportunity for offenders that can be used as an alternative to incarceration. DRC staff work closely with Parole/Probation Officers to address public safety concerns by addressing high risk/high need behaviors such as drug abuse, impulsivity, anti-social thinking, lack of employment and education, mental health concerns and lack of positive peer supports. In 2005 the Day Reporting Center was evaluated by this author. Findings included evidence of DRC's impact on recidivism with completers having a statistically significant 39% decrease in arrests pre- and post-DRC as compared to a 19% increase in arrests for non-completers. This current evaluation was conducted as a part of DCJ continuous quality improvement efforts. This form of monitoring allows course corrections to be made that are data and outcome driven. This evaluation utilized a sample of 642 offender referral entries to the Day Reporting Center in fiscal year 2008. These referral outcomes will be compared to 162 offenders who were referred to the DRC and no-showed. No-show samples are often used as comparison groups given they are identical in characteristics of the participants yet had no treatment (DRC) experience. Findings: Half of the episodes with engaged offenders resulted in 50% successful completion and 50% unsuccessful completion. The successful completion rate is up 5% from the 2005 study. Statistically significant reductions in pre- and post-DRC arrests were seen across all three groups: Successful -- 60% reduction --Unsuccessful -- 31% reduction - No show -- 27% reduction - Statistically significant percent of each group with post-arrests were in the expected direction: - Successful -- 12.1% of group had at least one arrest post-DRC exit - Unsuccessful -- 25.2% of group had at least one arrest post-DRC exit - No show - 38.9% of group had at least one arrest post-DRC exit - On average, the time to failure for the successful group was observed to be 50 days greater than the no show group. - Statistically significant differences were found between the DRC dosage of the successful group as compared to the unsuccessful group. Details: Portland, OR: Multnomah County Department of Community Justice, 2010. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed August 2, 2011 at: http://web.multco.us/sites/default/files/dcj/documents/drc_final_document.doc Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://web.multco.us/sites/default/files/dcj/documents/drc_final_document.doc Shelf Number: 122256 Keywords: Alternative to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsDay Reporting CentersIntensive ProbationParoleRehabilitation |
Author: Wilkinson, Reginald A., ed. Title: Reentry Best Practices: Directors' Perspectives Summary: This compendium presents reentry best practices that were submitted by member agencies. The submissions are clustered into five substantive areas. They were: (1) Prison Programs; (2) Transitional Programs; (3) Mental Health/Substance Abuse Programs; (4) Community Supervision Strategies; and (5) Promising or Unique Services. Details: Middleton, CT: Association of State Correctional Administrators, 2004. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://www.asca.net/system/assets/attachments/2075/Reentry_Best_Practices_Publication-1.pdf?1296149357 Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://www.asca.net/system/assets/attachments/2075/Reentry_Best_Practices_Publication-1.pdf?1296149357 Shelf Number: 122320 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsCorrectional ProgramsDrug Abuse TreatmentMental Health ServicesPrisoner Reentry (U.S.)Rehabilitation |
Author: Martin, Ginger Title: From Incarceration to Community: A Roadmap to Improving Prisoner Reentry and System Accountability in Massachusetts Summary: With the tremendous growth in incarceration in Massachusetts, inmates are returning to communities in record numbers. More than 20,000 prison and jail inmates are released to Massachusetts’ towns and cities each year. Policymakers have become increasingly concerned with how the corrections system should manage the reentry process to best protect the public and how communities can absorb and reintegrate returning prisoners. The entire reentry process must be strengthened. This report provides a roadmap for prisoner reentry in Massachusetts, drawing from the national research literature of evidence-based practices and interviews with experts, officials, practitioners, and community-based service providers. It addresses areas of policy that have a significant effect on reentry, from sentencing through post-release follow-up, with particular focus on the roles of the state prison system, houses of corrections, and parole. Details: Boston: Criminal and Justice Institute, 2004. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://cjinstitute.org/files/reentryrpt_1.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://cjinstitute.org/files/reentryrpt_1.pdf Shelf Number: 122326 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsParolePrisoner Reentry (Massachusetts)RecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Taxman, Faye S. Title: Proactive Community Supervision in Maryland: Changing Offender Outcomes Summary: With over 70,000 adult offenders under community supervision in the late 1990s, and more than 100 offenders assigned to each probation/parole agent, Maryland faced challenges similar to other states regarding the most effective strategy for supervising offenders in the community. In response to the 2000 Joint Chairmen’s Report, the Maryland Division of Parole and Probation (MDPP) developed a strategy to reengineer supervision by integrating research-based findings pertinent to protecting community safety and returning offenders to a more prosocial lifestyle. The strategy, called Proactive Community Supervision (PCS), has three goals: protect public safety; hold offenders accountable to victims and the community; and help offenders become responsible and productive (Sachwald, 2000). These goals are accomplished through the five major components of PCS: 1) identify criminogenic traits using a valid risk and need tool; 2) develop a supervision plan that addresses criminogenic traits employing effective external controls and treatment interventions; 3) hold the offender accountable for progress on the supervision plan; 4) use a place-based strategy wherein individual probation/parole office environments are engaged in implementing the strategy; and 5) develop partnerships with community organizations who will provide ancillary services to supervisees. Collectively, these five tenets are based on findings from research studies identifying crime reduction strategies over the last 30 years. Funds to implement the PCS strategy were appropriated for State Fiscal Year 2002. To allow MDPP to change the context of supervision, caseload sizes for intensive supervision by probation/parole agents were to be reduced from 100 to 55 in four areas: Mondawmin in Baltimore City, Hyattsville in Prince George’s County, Silver Spring in Montgomery County, and all of Caroline County. With PCS, probation/parole agents are armed with a research-based strategy regarding how to address the criminogenic traits that propel individuals to continue their involvement in criminal behavior. PCS offers a holistic approach for probation/parole agents to facilitate offender change while emphasizing accountability and public safety. This report presents an overview of the impact of the PCS strategy on key offender outcomes--rearrest rates, warrants for violation of probation, and adherence to offender supervision plans. To determine whether the PCS process achieves the intended goals, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and Virginia Commonwealth University evaluated the impact of the PCS process on offender outcomes. The evaluation study used an individual match design that compares the outcomes of 548 offenders — 274 randomly selected offenders supervised in PCS areas with 274 matched offenders in areas that use the traditional supervision model. The researchers found that participation in PCS had a positive effect on offender outcomes. In particular, regardless of the criminal history of the offender or risk level, the rates of rearrest and warrants filed for technical violations were significantly lower for offenders that were supervised under the PCS strategy. The PCS model has shown to have statistically significant outcomes for offenders compared to traditional methods of supervision. Details: College Park, MD: University of Maryland; Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University, 2006. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2011 at: http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/PCS_Evaluation_Feb06.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/PCS_Evaluation_Feb06.pdf Shelf Number: 122327 Keywords: CollaborationCommunity-based CorrectionsOffender Supervision (Maryland)ParoleProbationRecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Froundigoun, Liz Title: Evaluation of the Turnaround Service Summary: This research was commissioned to evaluate Turnaround, a new criminal justice service, which provides a community intervention service as an alternative to short term prison sentences for young men, aged 16-30, who are persistent low tariff offenders with drug and/or alcohol addictions and other issues, and have failed or are failing in other community-based alternatives. Turnaround is a partnership service, managed by Turning Point Scotland and delivered with Apex and the Venture Trust, which aims to provide a holistic approach to tackling the complex needs of this service group through a range of interventions to stabilise their addictions, reduce their offending, and through a range of programmes to increase their social and employability skills. It operates from four community bases in Irvine, Kilmarnock, Greenock and Dumbarton and since July, 2009, a 10 bed residential unit in Gleniffer Braes, Paisley. Methodology There were three stages to the research. Stage one involved a review of the existing academic and Turnaround literature, and introductory visits to the service to establish context and background. Stage two involved interviews with all staff in each of the four community day centres, all staff who were available to be interviewed at the residential unit and a sample of service users. All members of the advisory group were invited to participate in a telephone interview to clarify and expand on issues that arose either from our meeting with them or in the evaluation process. In stage three an analysis of statistical data provided by Turnaround from their data base was undertaken. This report documents and analyses the experience and views of the development of the service from the perspective of those strategically involved in its delivery through to frontline staff and service users. It is based on data obtained from interviews carried out in each of the five locations: Greenock, Dumbarton, Irvine, Kilmarnock, and the residential unit in Gleniffer Braes. Of particular interest to this study are the young men’s experiences and perceptions of the service. The research was conducted in line with the ethical guidelines of the British Sociological Association, The British Society of Criminology and Glasgow Caledonian University. Summary Findings 1. The service provided by Turnaround is much needed to support this service user group in desisting from offending and addiction behaviour. 2. All staff were well trained and committed in their belief of community-based person-centred interventions as an effective approach in dealing with these service users. 3. Service users are particularly enthusiastic in their appraisal of the service. In total 1306 referrals have been made to the service with 474 (36%) actively engaging in the programme through the community bases (see Table 2). This includes some service users who have had more than one period of engagement with the service. 4. The person-centred approach, they report, enables them to make effective transitions to recovery from a life of crime and addiction by addressing their most pressing needs. 5. All service users interviewed reported improvements in their quality of life: reduced offending, stabilisation of their addictions, improved family relationships including re-establishing contact with their children, access to training and skill building in readiness for employment. 6 Turnaround, where it is used as an alternative to short-term custodial sentences, is likely to produce significant financial savings and, as stated above, more likely to impact positively on the lifestyle, addiction and offending behaviours of their clients. Good Practice 7. Turnaround should be commended in five main areas: Partnership working with APEX and the Venture Trust in service delivery has allowed for a more holistic service to be provided. The person-centred approach to service delivery is unique in that its flexibility allows for clients to individualise their recovery programme. Flexibility and an open door policy were stressed by service users as invaluable. Staff training and induction are comprehensive and undertaken prior to working in either the community bases or residential unit. Turnaround’s data base is centrally maintained and contains extensive clients’ records; however, it has limited applicability for monitoring their progress. Lessons Learned 8 Delivering such a service is a lengthy process from identifying and defining the concept through to locating suitable premises, furnishing offices, training staff and opening the doors to service users. 9 Filling staff vacancies quickly is central to maintaining staff morale and ensuring the continued development of the service. 10 Time-limited funding is an issue for the development of new services and would appear to have been a contributing factor to staff moving on from Turnaround in the last year. 11 Meeting the requirement imposed by funders should be reviewed, as their expectations of ‘hard’ evidence cannot always be realised. 12 Developing links with referring agencies such as the Courts, Reliance and CJSW needs to be pro-active in order to establish an identity and awareness of Turnaround’s services. Areas for Development 13 A clear protocol for sharing of information across agencies is essential to ensure the smooth transition of service users between Turnaround and other service providers. 14 Opportunities to develop peer support should be considered. 15 Service users would like to see more support or a staged programme to exit using all drugs and/or alcohol rather than being on a stabilisation programme of methadone. 16 Service users would also like to see more day activities – swimming walking, canoeing, and abseiling - provided by Venture Trust rather than the 3-day or week long programmes that they have been able to access thus far. Outcomes 17 Where Turnaround is used as an alternative to the traditional, costly short-term custodial sentences so characteristic of the service users’ history, this is likely to provide significant financial savings. 18 The programme is impacting positively on the lives of its service users’ and on their offending behaviours and addiction issues, and in supporting them into stable lifestyle patterns, as well as improving social and employability skills. 19 The community bases are well established and despite the geographical difficulties of the Irvine base it is running well. All were found to be very effective and supportive from the service users’ point of view. 20 The service is not always running at its capacity especially at the residential unit; however there was little evidence to suggest that this was impacting on the quality of the service and as it develops the perception is that service user participation will increase. 21 While the service is delivered by highly qualified and committed staff some of the services delivered were compromised due to staffing shortages. 22 The majority of service users have been referred to Turnaround from the Courts, Reliance and CJSW. However, referrals from the Courts and Reliance show a lower uptake of Turnaround’s services than those referred from CJSW. Recommendations 1 Funding should be secured for another 3, preferably 5, year period, to allow the service to develop its potential without struggling with a constant turnover of staff. 2 Funding streams should be re-examined to see if there is any way of negotiating a staged or staggered approach to extending the funding period with the Scottish Government and the various charitable organisations currently supporting this project. 3 Referral routes and processes should be re-examined especially in relation to the Courts, Reliance and CJSW. The provision of clearer guidelines or criteria for selection of young offenders for referral to Turnaround may help to reduce the lower up-take of referrals from the Courts and Reliance. 4 The role of APEX workers should be reviewed. Currently they are working as support or project workers but as the service develops it is important that their role as Employment Development Advisors is retained. 5 The role of the Venture Trust should be re-examined. It is felt, amongst service users and staff, that there is considerable scope to develop their involvement to the benefit of the service and enhance the service users’ experience and skills. 6 There is the desire for more physical activities amongst the service users, for example, swimming, canoeing, abseiling, walking, football, and in the residential unit for supervised access to the gym. Consideration should be given as to the best way to provide these activities in ways which allow service users to develop and build on their inter-personal, communication and team-work skills. 7 Consideration should be given to extending the age range to 16-40 and also to including girls and young women in service provision. While this may be problematic, staff experiences suggest that there is an unmet demand from girls and women and from older men whom they currently cannot accommodate. Suggestions proffered by staff included splitting the service delivery into two categories - a young person service 16-25, with another to focus on the older group 25-40. 8 Communication strategies should also be reviewed. In relation to staffing, morale and identity of the service, a clear communications strategy and more all-staff meetings are needed to encourage a homogenised service and the exchange of good practice between the various community bases and the residential unit. 9 Exit procedures should also be reviewed and protocols set in place with partnership agencies to ensure a smooth transition between support services for service users. 10 Peer support opportunities should be considered to widen the service range. Some service users report that contact with ex-service users is helpful and indeed some of the current service users feel they could offer peer support to those who have just come to Turnaround. Details: Glasgow: Glasgow Caledonian University, 2011. 95p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2011 at: www.turningpointscotland.com/documents/6618 Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 123312 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity Corrections (Scotland)Community ServiceCommunity-based Corrections |
Author: Boyd, Carol J. Title: Program Evaluation of Michigan Department of Corrections' Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT): A Descriptive Assessment of Prison and Community-Based Treatment Programs Summary: The relationship between criminal behavior and substance abuse has been well documented and social systems that support a drug or criminal lifestyle share several common features. In order to address these commonalities, the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) offers several types of treatment in prison and in the community. In 1998, MDOC used federal and State monies to pilot three RSAT programs in order to test the benefits of a residential program situated in a prison setting. An independent evaluation of the RSAT programs was mandated and in 1999 the University of Michigan’s Substance Abuse Research Center, under the direction of Dr. Carol J. Boyd, began annual and independent evaluation of the three RSAT programs in MDOC. Program evaluations for the previous two fiscal years were filed with the Michigan Department of Corrections. Those reports included assessments of the developmental and implementation aspects of the programs. Since this third report covers the fiscal year of October 1, 2000 through September 30, 2001 and RSAT graduates are now out of prison and living in their communities, this report focuses on program outcomes. The original RSAT pilot envisioned 150 RSAT beds, funded through a combination of federal grant and State funds. Additional RSAT beds were funded through the availability of legislative pilot funding. As of 9/30/01, the MDOC operates two pilot RSAT programs totaling 230 beds, providing service to both male and female offenders. The goal of the RSAT programs is to reduce relapse and recidivism among substance abusing offenders through therapeutic interventions that prepare them for return to the community. The programs aim to accomplish these goals by providing six months (nine months at Macomb) of residential treatment. The therapeutic focus is on reducing both substance abuse and criminal behaviors by using a cognitive behavioral treatment model. This treatment model has an orientation phase, two intensive treatment phases and a brief segment for preparation to return to the community. The RSAT treatment units, based on the ‘therapeutic community’ living model, have been substantially modified to fit the needs of the prisons. As such, the living units are dedicated to treatment, but not entirely self-contained. RSAT participants interact with fellow prisoners in the yard, at mealtimes and on their jobs. Upon graduation residents of the RSAT programs have the option of entering a follow up treatment program in a step-down unit for up to six months. After release from prison, RSAT graduates are followed for 12 months in the community during which time they are referred for outpatient substance abuse treatment. Details: Substance Abuse Research Center, University of Michigan, 2002. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 2, 2012 at http://www.michigan.gov/documents/040102sec306%282%29RSAT_18215_7.pdf Year: 2002 Country: United States URL: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/040102sec306%282%29RSAT_18215_7.pdf Shelf Number: 124356 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsCorrectionsDrug Treatment ProgramsResidential Treatment Centers (Michigan)Substance Abuse |
Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) Title: Juvenile Detention in Cook County: Future Directions Summary: Cook County has a long and proud tradition of progressive practice in juvenile justice - not only with the advent of the first juvenile court but as a national leader through the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative. The last two decades, however, have brought intense scrutiny in the area of juvenile detention culminating in a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union alleging a range of violations including overcrowding, unsafe and unsanitary conditions, and regular exposure to violence and abuse. With the intervention of federal courts, substantial progress has been made to date and additional improvements are planned or underway. Nonetheless, substantial concern continues that such reforms cannot fully resolve the challenges presented by the existing facility. In the belief that it is time for Cook County to once again set a new standard - this time for youth detention - the Jane Addams Juvenile Court Foundation (JAJCF), on behalf of the Chief Judge of Cook County, has commissioned the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) to conduct this study of youth detention in Cook County. This study looks beyond the challenges of the current facility to examine more fundamentally the detention needs of the county and its youth. The ultimate goal of the study is to guide discussion regarding a new vision for detention in Cook County - a vision that holds to the ideals that informed the creation of the court in 1899 while recognizing the current circumstances in which the court operates. After careful assessment and discussion with experts within the County, it is the opinion of NCCD that, even after appropriate reforms are implemented, the current Juvenile Temporary Detention Center (JTDC) will have at best limited capacity to meet the complex needs of youth being detained in Cook County. Working with JAJCF, NCCD instead offers the following vision for detention in Cook County, one that rests on the conviction that secure detention must be one element of a cohesive juvenile justice system that includes efficient case processing, a range of alternatives to avoid unneccessary confinement, and equity for children of all races and ethnicities. Cook County shoud maximize community safety and the health and well-being of its youth and families by: reserving secure detention for only those youth who present a real threat to the safety of the community; providing youth who must be detained with meaningful assessment, case management, and programming; detaining youth in small, safe, community-based facilities consistent with best practice; and ensuring that decision making is guided by timely, accurate information about the youth and all aspects of the juvenile justice system. Details: Madison, Wisconsin: National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD), 2012. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2012 at: http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/dnld/JuvenileDetentioninCookCounty.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/dnld/JuvenileDetentioninCookCounty.pdf Shelf Number: 124609 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsJuvenile DetentionJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice SystemJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Grella, Christine Title: Female Offender Treatment and Employment Project (FOTEP) Final Evaluation Report FY 2003-2006 Summary: The Female Offender Treatment and Employment Project (FOTEP) was initiated in 1999, following legislation requiring the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to provide intensive training and counseling services for female parolees. The goal of FOTEP is to assist female parolees in their successful reintegration into the community following their completion of an in-prison therapeutic community substance abuse program (SAP) and discharge from prison. The FOTEP aims to promote recovery, to improve parenting skills and foster family reunification, and to assist participants in entering the workforce. Details: California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, 2008. 10p. Source: FOTEP Final Evaluation Report, FY03-06 DRAFT: Internet Resource: Accessed May 13, 2012 at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/DARS/docs/FOTEP_EvalRpt_06.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/DARS/docs/FOTEP_EvalRpt_06.pdf Shelf Number: 125245 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsFemale Offenders (California)Parolees (California)ReintegrationVocational Education and Training |
Author: American Probation and Parole Association Title: Hardcore Drunk Driving Community Supervision Guide: A Resource Outlining Probation & Parole Challenges, Effective Strategies and Model Programs Summary: The American Probation and Parole Association and the Century Council convened a group of community supervision and corrections experts to develop the “Hardcore Drunk Driving Community Supervision Guide: A Resource for Outlining Supervision Challenges, Effective Strategies, and Model Programs.” This guide combines the latest in evidenced-based supervision practices with treatment strategies known to work with alcohol involved and DUI/DWI offenders. The advisory group assembled to develop this guide began by identifying what would educate and benefit the community corrections field. To that end, the group identified supervision challenges, and where applicable possible solutions to those challenges, promising practices working in their jurisdictions, and an array of resources for community corrections practitioners and administrators to turn to for additional information and guidance. What is meant by saying that someone is supervised in the community? It means that probation and/or parole officers using a combined approach involving surveillance, treatment, and accountability, enforce the court ordered rules and sentencing meted out to the offenders. Details: Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association; Arlington, VA: Century Council, 2012. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 30, 2012 at: http://www.centurycouncil.org/sites/default/files/materials/HCDD-Community-Supervision-Guide.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.centurycouncil.org/sites/default/files/materials/HCDD-Community-Supervision-Guide.pdf Shelf Number: 125799 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity CorrectionsCommunity-based CorrectionsDriving Under the Influence (U.S.)Drunk DrivingParoleProbation |
Author: Furby, Brett Title: Evaluation of Community Offender Services Programs Drug and Alcohol Addiction and Relapse Prevention - Three Years Out Summary: Community Offender Services (COS), within Corrective Services NSW (CSNSW) is responsible for the management of offenders serving community-based sentences across 60 NSW district offices. The Drug and Alcohol Addiction Program (DAAP) and Relapse Prevention Program (RPP) were designed to be delivered by Probation and Parole Officers (PPOs) who supervise the participating offenders. These programs formed part of a drug and alcohol intervention strategy aimed to enhance the range of options that PPOs may use to assist community-based offenders under supervision in breaking the cycle of drug dependency and crime. CSNSW received funding from the NSW Drug Summit Initiative to develop, implement and evaluate these programs. The first year of the programs has previously been reported. This report details findings from the second and third years of program delivery to end September, 2008. Trends are examined on program activity data, participant characteristics and re-offending rates since program inception. At three years out, program effects remain positive with offenders showing marked improvements in levels of drug dependency, stage of change in problem resolution and legal outcomes. Details: ydney: Corporate Research, Evaluation & Statistics, NSW Department of Corrective Services, 2011. 30p. Source: Research Bulletin No. 33: Internet Resource: Accessed January 13, 2013 at http://143.119.253.176/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/447299/RB33-Evaluation-of-Community-Offender-Services-Programs-Drug-and-Alcohol-Addiction-and-Relapse-Prevention-Three-Years-Out.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 127279 Keywords: Alcohol AbuseCommunity-based CorrectionsDrug Abuse and AddictionEvaluative StudiesIntervention Programs |
Author: Trotter, Chris Title: Effective Community-Based Supervision of Young Offenders Summary: An increasing body of research suggests that some interventions with offenders can reduce reoffending. While little of this research has focused on the impact of routine supervision of offenders on probation, parole or other community-based orders, a few studies have found that when supervisors make use of a number of specific practice skills, there is a reduced rate of recidivism for those under their supervision. Having first described the effective practice skills, the extent to which these are applied to a population of young offenders is assessed, along with the resultant effect on recidivism. The study involved the direct observation of 117 worker/client interviews conducted by juvenile justice workers in New South Wales. It was found, as with earlier studies generally done with adults, that when workers used particular practice skills, the young people under their supervision had lower reoffending rates. It also found that workers who provided a counselling role made more use of the effective practice skills than workers who did not. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2012. 7p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice no. 448: Accessed February 8, 2013 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi448.html Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi448.html Shelf Number: 127548 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsInterventionsJuvenile Offenders (Australia)Offender Supervision |
Author: Hough, Mike Title: Intelligent Justice Balancing the Effects of Community Sentences and Custody Summary: The debate over whether ‘prison works’ seems interminable. The Howard League for Penal Reform has well established views on this topic, but political realities make revisiting this question, and perhaps deconstructing assumptions on both sides of the argument, both timely and valuable. The prison population in England and Wales has more than doubled since the mid 1990s. While the latest projections over the coming six years suggest that this growth may be slowing, there is no suggestion that the number of men, women and children incarcerated on any one day will drop below 80,000. Statisticians’ most optimistic assessment suggests numbers could at most drop to the level first reached in 2007 – an increase of 86 per cent compared to the prison population in 1991. At the same time, the realities of running a justice system during an age of austerity are becoming ever clearer. The Ministry of Justice must achieve £2bn annual savings by March 2015 and the failure to deliver sentencing reforms originally proposed by Kenneth Clarke has meant that around £130m of potential savings have been lost. A recent report by the National Audit Office found that the agency in charge of prisons and probation is now projected to overspend by £32m in 2012-13 alone. If that is the difficult context for policymakers, then this paper provides a framework for new thinking that might provide an escape from the current prisons crisis. The Ministry of Justice does not have the funds to build its way out of the overcrowding in the system, and there is little scope for further efficiency savings without endangering key principles of security and giving up on any pretence of a ‘rehabilitation revolution’. As the Chief Inspector of Prisons wrote in his most recent annual report, “if a rehabilitation revolution is to be delivered, there is a clear choice for politicians and policy makers – reduce prison populations or increase prison budgets.” This paper begins by examining the perennial arguments around the efficacy of community sentencing over short spells in custody. An even-handed analysis concedes that the picture is not a simple one, and that indeed it is the very complexity of the problem that necessitates a value-based approach to penal policy. It suggests that any cost-benefit analysis must take into account the long term impact of dramatic increases in imprisonment, which bring with them increases in a number of social problems that themselves sow the seeds for future crime: be it family breakdown, drug and alcohol addiction or poor physical and mental health. In the United States for example, this has seen the creation of a system “that feeds upon itself” and which has left many individual states near bankruptcy. 4 The authors conclude by asking for a new emphasis on not simply the prevention of reoffending through deterrence or incapacitation, but on constructing a penal system which seeks to encourage compliance with the law. This idea that people respond best when buying into behaviour such as abiding by the law, rather than being constantly compelled or cajoled into doing so, has powerful implications for future policymaking. It suggests, for example, that a narrow focus on paying providers by their results using the limited picture of reconviction rates may not be the best way to structure prisons and probation. It also suggests that an overweening focus on containing risk, essentially basing a system on a fear of failure, precludes redemptive narratives that promise more success in changing lives and reducing crime. Is the penal system to be based on unaffordable expansion and a fear of failure, or shall it live within its means and celebrate success? This is a question that must be answered sooner rather than later. Details: London: Howard League for Penal Reform, 2012. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2013 at: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Intelligent_Justice.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Intelligent_Justice.pdf Shelf Number: 127550 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsCosts of Criminal Justice (U.K.) |
Author: Deloitte Access Economics Title: An Economic Analysis for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Offenders. Prison vs Residential Treatment Summary: Deloitte Access Economics was appointed by NIDAC to: • examine the patterns and prevalence of Indigenous people in the prison system • outline the impact and implications of incarceration of Indigenous people, and • analyse the costs and benefits of addressing Indigenous problematic alcohol and drug use with treatment, particularly residential rehabilitation, as compared to prison. Indigenous Australians are over-represented in Australian prisons. At 30 June 2011, there were 29 106 prisoners in Australian prisons, of which 7656 (26%) were Indigenous (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011a). By comparison, 2.5 per cent of the total population was Indigenous in 2011 (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011b). In 2010–11, the imprisonment rate for Indigenous adults (aged 18 years or over) was 1746.51 per 100 000 compared with a corresponding rate of 125.4 for non-Indigenous people — a ratio of Indigenous to non- Indigenous imprisonment rates of 13.9 (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision 2012). In 2011, 70 per cent of Indigenous prisoners convicted of a violent offence had been previously convicted, and 81 per cent of Indigenous prisoners convicted of a non-violent offence (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011a). Indigenous prisoners were more likely to have been convicted of a prior offence than non-Indigenous prisoners. The majority of prisoners whose primary conviction was non-violent faced sentences (or expected to serve time) of less than five years, with more than three-quarters expected to serve less than two years. Overall, the proportion of Indigenous prisoners with an expected serving time of less than two years was 31 per cent. Around 68 per cent of Indigenous (and 65 per cent of non-Indigenous) prison entrants selfreported having used illicit drugs during the preceding 12 months (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2011a). Of all Indigenous prison entrants, those aged 18–24 years old were most likely to have used illicit drugs (76%). Based on data from a New South Wales survey, Indigenous prisoners are also significantly more likely to be dependent on alcohol than non-Indigenous prisoners, and Indigenous men were significantly more likely to report that they were intoxicated at the time of the offence for which they were incarcerated (Indiget al. 2010). Over the course of 2011, approximately 2476 Indigenous men and 400 Indigenous women entered2 prisons in Australia (based on analysis of data from Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011a). For the purposes of this study, Indigenous people who experience problematic drug or alcohol use and who are in prison for non-violent offences were seen as potentially benefiting from diversion from prison into a residential treatment program. Approximately half of Indigenous prisoners linked their offending to drug and alcohol use — suggesting approximately 3827 Indigenous prisoners in 2011 (see section 2.2). Excluding those who stated that their most serious offence was a violent offence leaves approximately 1607 Indigenous prisoners in 2011 who committed a non-violent offence which they attributed to drug and alcohol use. There are many factors that influence the choice of treatment, and the appropriateness of diversion, so the estimates here should be interpreted as broad approximations. Nevertheless, the potential quantum of the offender population who could be considered for diversion into residential rehabilitation treatment is around 1600 in 2011. Details: Canberra: National Indigenous Drug and Alcohol Committee, Australian National Council on Drugs, 2012. 86p. Source: Internet Resource: ANCD Research Paper; 24: Accessed February 8, 2013 at: https://www.deloitteaccesseconomics.com.au/uploads/File/NIDAC_Deloitte%20Access%20Economics%20Report(1).pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: https://www.deloitteaccesseconomics.com.au/uploads/File/NIDAC_Deloitte%20Access%20Economics%20Report(1).pdf Shelf Number: 127551 Keywords: AboriginalsAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeIndigenous OffendersIndigenous Peoples (Australia)Prisons |
Author: McCoy, Ellie Title: Evaluation of the Liverpool Women’s Turnaround Project Summary: Offending is less common amongst females, and women offenders often have complex multiple needs. The majority of women sentenced to prison are convicted of non-violent offences and are most often sent to prison for acquisitive crimes. Women offenders are likely to have multiple presenting problems including drug and alcohol misuse, accommodation needs, education and training needs, employment needs and financial needs and are often victims of domestic abuse. A significant proportion of women in prison are mothers and the sole carers of dependent children. A review of women with vulnerabilities in the Criminal Justice System was published in 2007 (the Corston report) and considered the needs of females inappropriately placed in prison and those outside of prison who were at risk of offending. The review highlighted the need for a new approach for working with women. Provision is traditionally focused on the needs of male offenders and does not meet the needs of females. There is a need for community provision to meet the needs of women, which requires a multi agency, women centred, holistic approach. Following the review, funding was made available to develop community provision aimed at diverting women away from custody. The Turnaround Project is part of the organisation PSS (Person Shaped Support, formerly known as Liverpool Personal Service Society). It is a female only service for Liverpool residents (and has now been expanded to cover Knowsley residents) who are already involved or at risk of becoming involved with the Criminal Justice System. The project is commissioned by Merseyside Probation Trust with additional funding from Liverpool Primary Care Trust. The Turnaround Project provides a service that fits the needs of women to help them tackle the reasons why they commit crimes and to reduce the risk of further offending and is designed to address attitudes and behaviours that may contribute to offending. The project is designed to divert women away from prison and therefore aims to reduce the number of females in prison, which will in turn work towards reducing family breakdown and the number of children taken out of the care of their mothers. The project is made up of a team of experienced staff who work with women who have practical, personal and emotional difficulties. The project offers a number of services, including legal advice, mediation and advocacy, housing, benefit and debt management, employment, education and training opportunities, drug and alcohol abuse, offending behaviour, domestic abuse, reading, IT, health, cooking and counselling. This research evaluation was commissioned by Liverpool PCT. The evaluation provides information on the Turnaround Project, activities and interventions undertaken and the outcomes achieved by the females accessing the project. This evaluation highlights good practice and makes recommendations for improvement of the project. The findings from the evaluation will be used to inform future commissioning decisions. Details: Liverpool: Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University, 2013. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 4, 2013 at: http://www.cph.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Evaluation-of-the-Liverpool-Turnaround-Project.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cph.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Evaluation-of-the-Liverpool-Turnaround-Project.pdf Shelf Number: 128214 Keywords: Alternative to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsFemale Offenders (U.K.) |
Author: Chana, Rajinder Title: A Local Evaluation of the Intensive Alternative to Custody Pilot in Leeds Summary: This local evaluation aimed to examine the extent to which the Intensive Alternative to Custody (IAC) pilot was implemented in Leeds, capture any issues and areas of good practice, measure whether it was fulfilling its aims, and to measure throughput, compliance, and completion levels. It also sought to capture re-offending rates. There are seven pilots nationally, each aimed at offenders who are on the cusp of custody. The Order is proposed for eligible offenders at the pre-sentence stage and sentencers can select from a range of punitive and rehabilitative requirements to create a tailored community-based intervention with intensive management. There are five enforceable weekly contacts for a minimum of the first 16 weeks. Post-16 week intensive appointments are at the offender manager’s discretion based on progress made. Thereafter, the Order reverts to a Community Order. The Leeds IAC is co-located with two voluntary partnership organisations; Crime Reduction Initiative (CRI) and Developing Initiatives Supporting Communities (DISC). Along with these and the Together Women Project, outreach work and interventions are offered alongside punitive elements such as a curfew or community payback requirement. Restorative Justice (RJ) is another element of the Order. Data was obtained from questionnaires administered to offenders during the Order; a data monitoring spreadsheet; CRAMS and OASys systems; Police re-offending systems; gatekeeping forms; and from interviews with offenders and stakeholders including the project manager. The purpose of this data collection and analysis was to answer the following questions. 1. Was the project delivered as planned? What were the barriers to delivery and how could they be overcome? 2. What are the views of project stakeholders (including offenders, their family, and victims) and how well do they think the project has been implemented? What impact do they think it may have had? 3. What are the views of offenders who fail to complete the Order? Details: Wakefield, UK: West Yorkshire Probation Trust, 2011. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 5, 2013 at: http://www.westyorksprobation.org.uk/documentlist.php?type=1&year=2011 Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.westyorksprobation.org.uk/documentlist.php?type=1&year=2011 Shelf Number: 128266 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration (U.K.)Community-based CorrectionsIntensive Supervision |
Author: Robinson, Emma Title: What Women Want? An Evaluation of the TWP/EVOLVE partnership with West Yorkshire Probation Summary: This research was commissioned to evaluate the partnership arrangements between West Yorkshire Probation Trust, WomenCentre and the Together Women Project (TWP). Within these partnerships, a percentage of WYPT’s female offenders are co-supervised by Offender Managers and Project Workers at partner premises in Calderdale (WomenCentre), Leeds and Bradford (both TWP). The aim of the evaluation was to follow-up cases referred to both TWP and WomenCentre The evaluation sample comprised 150 women who have been supervised by either of the two agencies. Interviews were also conducted with offenders, project staff, and offender managers co-located at the partner agency premises. Details: Wakefield, UK: West Yorkshire Probation Services, 2010. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 5, 2013 at: http://www.westyorksprobation.org.uk/documentlist.php?type=1&year=2010 Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.westyorksprobation.org.uk/documentlist.php?type=1&year=2010 Shelf Number: 128268 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsFemale Offenders (U.K.)PartnershipsProbationProbationers |
Author: Queensland Corrective Services Title: Court Ordered Parole in Queensland Summary: This paper provides the findings of an analysis of the trends and impact of court ordered parole since it was introduced in August 2006 with the Corrective Services Act 2006. The introduction of court ordered parole has ensured more offenders are under active supervision in the community. This order type is a high volume order; more than 5,515 orders were made in 2012 and more than 3,000 offenders are in the community on court ordered parole at any one time. Approximately 40% of those who receive court ordered parole are paroled straight from court. Offenders on court ordered parole generally serve shorter sentences with 66% serving a sentence of 12 months or less in duration. This group could potentially have received wholly suspended sentences with no community supervision. Queensland Corrective Services (QCS) has a strict regime when supervising offenders in the community to identify and facilitate appropriate responses to risk. An examination of the data, with particular focus on the suspension and cancellation rates, demonstrates that: • approximately 300 offenders per month are suspended and returned to prison (most common reason is an unacceptable risk of further offending); • almost 1,800 prisoners in custody are there for a violation of court ordered parole (order suspended or cancelled); and • reoffending accounts for half of the orders cancelled by the Parole Board. The introduction of court ordered parole aimed to address the over-representation of short-sentenced, low-risk prisoners in QCS facilities; such prisoners were responsible for a high degree of turnover in the prison population. Prior to the introduction of court ordered parole, prisoner numbers were forecast to grow. However, this order type stabilised growth in prisoner numbers from 2006 until recently. This suggests that court ordered parole has reversed the growth in short sentence prisoners, delaying the need to invest in prison infrastructure. Overall, court ordered parole is QCS’ most successful supervision order with approximately 72% of orders successfully completed without cancellation or reconviction. Details: Brisbane: Queensland Corrective Services, 2013. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Paper No. 4: Accessed July 8, 2013 at: http://www.correctiveservices.qld.gov.au/Publications/Research_Publications/Court_Ordered_Parole_Research_Paper.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.correctiveservices.qld.gov.au/Publications/Research_Publications/Court_Ordered_Parole_Research_Paper.pdf Shelf Number: 129267 Keywords: Community-based CorrectionsEarly ResearchParole (Australia)Parolees |
Author: Ringland, Clare Title: Sentencing Outcomes for Those Assessed for Intensive Correction Order Suitability Summary: Aim: To examine outcomes of assessments for intensive correction orders, including the penalties imposed on those deemed unsuitable. Method: Assessment data for intensive correction orders were obtained from Corrective Services NSW and linked to finalised court appearances between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2012. The proportion of assessment episodes associated with a finalised court appearance where an intensive correction order was imposed and the penalties imposed on offenders who did not receive an intensive correction order were examined. Results: 2,580 assessment episodes were identified, with 93 per cent (n=2,389) linked to a finalised court appearance. Of these assessment episodes linked to a court appearance, 55 per cent resulted in an intensive correction order. Of the assessment episodes linked to a finalised court appearance resulting in a sentence other than an intensive correction order, the most common penalties imposed were imprisonment (58%), a suspended sentence with supervision (16%) and a suspended sentence without supervision (8%). Conclusion: In line with intensive correction orders being introduced as an alternative to full-time imprisonment, the vast majority of offenders assessed for an intensive correction order who do not receive one instead receive a penalty of imprisonment or an alternative form of imprisonment (i.e., home detention or a suspended sentence). Details: Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2013. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Paper no. 86: Accessed July 8, 2013 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/BB86.pdf/$file/BB86.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/BB86.pdf/$file/BB86.pdf Shelf Number: 129276 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsIntensive SupervisionSentencing (Australia) |
Author: Lin, Jeffrey Title: Follow the Money: How California Counties Are Spending Their Public Safety Realignment Funds Summary: The California correctional system is undergoing a dramatic transformation under Assembly Bill 109 ("Realignment"), a law that shifted responsibility from the state to the counties for tens of thousands of offenders. To help manage this change, the state will distribute $4.4 billion to the counties by 2016-2017. While the legislation directs counties to use these funds for community-based programs, counties retain a substantial amount of spending discretion. Some are expanding offender treatment capacities, while others are shoring up enforcement and control apparatuses. In this report we examine counties' AB 109 spending reports and budgets to determine which counties emphasize enforcement and which emphasize treatment. We also identify counties that continue to emphasize prior orientations toward punishment and counties that have shifted their priorities in response to Realignment. We then apply quantitative and comparative methods to county budget data to identify political, economic, and criminal justice-related factors that may explain higher AB 109 spending on enforcement or higher spending on treatment, relative to other counties. In short, our analysis shows that counties that elect to allocate more AB 109 funds to enforcement and control generally appear to be responding to local criminal justice needs, including high crime rates, a shortage of law enforcement personnel, and a historic preference for using prison to punish drug offenders. Counties that favor a greater investment in offender treatment and services, meanwhile, are typified by strong electoral support for the Sheriff and relatively under-funded district attorneys and probation departments. Details: Stanford, CA: Stanford law School, Criminal Justice Center, 2013. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 26, 2013 at: https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publication/443760/doc/slspublic/Money-Oct%202013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publication/443760/doc/slspublic/Money-Oct%202013.pdf Shelf Number: 131710 Keywords: California RealignmentCommunity-Based CorrectionsCorrectional Institutions (California)Costs of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformPrisons |
Author: Ringland, Clare Title: The Impact of Intensive Correction Orders on Re-Offending Summary: Aim: To examine the risk of re-offending of those who received an intensive correction order (ICO), relative to those who received periodic detention and suspended sentences with supervision. Method: Details of offenders' demographic and offence characteristics, prior convictions and penalties received, and re-offences were extracted from the Re-offending Database maintained by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Using propensity score modelling, offenders who received an ICO as a principal penalty in a NSW court between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2012 were matched to two comparable groups of offenders who received periodic detention between 1 October 2007 and 30 September 2009 and suspended sentences with supervision between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2012. A supplementary comparison with those who received suspended sentences with supervision included matching on Level of Service Inventory - Revised (LSI-R) assessment scores, in addition to demographic and offending characteristics. Time to first re-offence was estimated using the Nelson-Aalen estimator of the cumulative hazard rate function and compared between groups using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: An offender on an ICO had 33 per cent less risk of re-offending than an offender on periodic detention (HR=0.67, 95% confidence interval (0.55, 0.83), p<.001). There was no significant difference in re-offending between those who received ICOs and supervised suspended sentences after taking into account LSI-R assessment scores. Conclusion: There is some evidence to suggest that ICOs are more effective than periodic detention in terms of re-offending rates. However, future evaluations should include more detailed offender, treatment and program participation information in order to better understand any observed differences between comparison groups. Details: Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 176: Accessed May 7, 2014 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l2/cjb176.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l2/cjb176.pdf Shelf Number: 132261 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsIntensive SupervisionRecidivismReoffending |
Author: Pew Center on the States Title: Arkansas's 2011 Public Safety Reform: Legislation to Reduce Recidivism and Curtail Prison Growth Summary: In 2011, Arkansas's prison population had more than doubled over the course of two decades, driving corrections costs up more than 800 percent. At the same time, recidivism and crime rates remained stubbornly high. Without action, the prison population would have grown by as much as 43 percent and cost Arkansas taxpayers an additional $1.1 billion over the next decade. State leaders established a bipartisan, inter-branch working group to examine the drivers of Arkansas's prison population growth. With technical assistance from the Pew Center on the States and its partners, The Arkansas Working Group on Sentencing and Corrections conducted an extensive review of state data and issued recommendations to reduce recidivism and contain corrections costs. In March of 2011, the Public Safety Improvement Act passed the Arkansas General Assembly with overwhelming bipartisan majorities and was signed into law by Governor Mike Beebe. The new law will cut Arkansas's prison population growth in half, avert $875 million in new prison costs and improve public safety by investing in evidence-based community supervision practices. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States, 2011. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed July 18, 2014 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/PewArkansasbriefpdf.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/PewArkansasbriefpdf.pdf Shelf Number: 114679 Keywords: Alternative to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsCosts of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticePrisons (Arkansas)Recidivism |
Author: Victoria (Australia). Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Community Correction Orders in the Higher Courts: Imposition, Duration, and Conditions Summary: Using both quantitative and qualitative analyses of judges' sentencing remarks, Community Correction Orders in the Higher Courts examines CCOs imposed by Victorian higher courts in the 18 months to June 2013. 1.1 This report builds on the findings from the Council's Community Correction Orders: Monitoring Report, which examines a range of factors associated with the use of community correction orders (CCOs). This report presents the findings of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of sentencing remarks for CCOs imposed by the Supreme and County Courts (the higher courts) between January 2012 and June 2013 (inclusive). The analysis has been undertaken to identify case variables influencing the imposition of CCOs, long CCOs (over 2 years duration), and the most frequently imposed conditions. 1.2 The methodology can be summarised as follows: - the sentencing remarks of 437 of the 460 CCOs imposed in the higher courts over this 18 month period are analysed; - the quantitative analysis examines 32 case variables, focusing on the offender, the offence, the victim, and the legal process, and is based on a binary logistic regression; - the imposition of CCOs is compared to short terms of imprisonment for armed robbery, aggravated burglary, and cause serious injury (both intentionally and recklessly); and - the qualitative analysis considers 157 CCO sentencing remarks and a smaller sample of short terms of imprisonment remarks involving the examination of a range of variables associated with the case characteristics. 1.3 With respect to the imposition of a CCO relative to a short term of imprisonment, the quantitative analysis finds that: - the majority of case variables do not predict if a CCO or short term of imprisonment will be imposed; - the only variable that consistently increases the likelihood of the imposition of a CCO (although non-significant for armed robbery) is whether the offender is currently employed and/or involved in an educational program; and - the involvement of drugs and/or alcohol in the offence has an inconsistent predictive influence, increasing the likelihood of a CCO for aggravated burglary, decreasing the likelihood for armed robbery, and having no consistent predictive influence for serious injury. 1.4 Examination of the specific case variables collected for the qualitative research reveals that, for certain judges, some additional factors influence the imposition of a CCO relative to a short term of imprisonment for specific cases. For example: - youth, mental illness, and a significant delay between the offending and sentencing, particularly where accompanied by demonstrated efforts at rehabilitation, influence the imposition of a CCO in some cases; and - previous offending and the seriousness of the instant offending consistently influence the imposition of an order of imprisonment. 1.5 As each sentencing decision is the result of instinctive synthesis, the differences in the sentences imposed could point to differences in the case facts (for example, offender age, nature and extent of prior offending). However, relevant similarities in those case facts, as evidenced by the sentencing remarks on either side of the dispositional divide, indicate that the difference may also be attributable to differences in the weighting of similar case facts. 1.6 With respect to duration, the qualitative analysis of sentencing remarks reveals that the courts provide little explicit guidance on, or clear explanation of, the sentencing purposes intended to be achieved by the imposition of a long CCO. Where comment has been made, the length of the order has been determined by issues of parity, the need to allow appropriate time for completion of rehabilitation courses, or the decision to make the sentence more onerous. 1.7 With respect to the combination of conditions attached to each CCO, the majority of quantitative variables do not make a significant contribution to predicting when a particular CCO condition will be imposed. There is also little judicial comment in the sentencing remarks that directly addresses the sentencing purposes for imposing certain CCO conditions. 1.8 The methodology examines the subjective and objective factors that interact in the complex sentencing process. There are inherent difficulties in clearly assessing the role of quantitative and qualitative factors in judgments based on instinctive synthesis. However, traditional legal analysis of sentencing remarks - in conjunction with the quantitative and qualitative techniques used in this study - allows certain inferences to be made. 1.9 A CCO is a new and different form of sanction. It is not a rebranded version of earlier forms of community-based sanctions. A much broader range of conditions can be imposed on a CCO, and a CCO can be imposed in the higher courts for a period up to the maximum penalty for an offence. However, the duration (85% - 2 years) and conditions attached to CCOs are very similar to those attached to community-based orders (CBOs). An analysis of a range of case factors indicates that the majority of these variables do not contribute to predicting the imposition of a CCO or the duration or conditions attached to a CCO. 1.10 Further research is necessary to gain a better understanding of what is influencing sentencing behaviour in the imposition of CCOs. Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2014. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 10, 2014 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Community%20Correction%20Orders%20in%20the%20Higher%20Courts.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Community%20Correction%20Orders%20in%20the%20Higher%20Courts.pdf Shelf Number: 134311 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsCriminal CourtsSentencing (Australia) |
Author: American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California Title: A Way Forward: Diverting People with Mental Illness from Inhumane and Expensive Jails into Community-Based Treatment that Works Summary: Jails have become warehouses for people with mental illness. Nationwide, nearly half a million inmates with mental illness are in local jails, and an estimated 10-25% have a serious mental illness, such as schizophrenia. In Los Angeles County alone, at least 3,200 inmates with a diagnosed severe mental illness crowd the jails on a typical day, which constitutes about 17% of the jail population. These numbers capture only the number of inmates with a diagnosed severe mental illness: the actual number may well be higher. Former Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca has called L.A.'s jail system "the nation's largest mental hospital." The war on drugs and other law enforcement policies have resulted in mass incarceration of low-level drug and other non-violent offenders, many of whom are arrested for behaviors related to a mental illness. In L.A., roughly 1,100 inmates with mental illness are behind bars on an average night for charges or convictions for nonviolent offenses. And many of the behaviors that lead to such charges are rooted in mental illness. According to the Vera Institute of Justice, drug offenses make up the largest portion of charges for this inmate population, nearly 27%. "Mental illness frequently becomes de facto criminalized when those affected by it use illegal drugs, sometimes as a form of self-medication, or engage in behaviors that draw attention and police response." After drug crimes, status offenses, administrative offenses, and parole violations are the most common charges or convictions for which people with mental illness are held in L.A.'s jails. For those with mental illness, incarceration causes needless suffering and even death. Not only does the lack of adequate care in jails and prisons exacerbate the symptoms of mental illness, but also overcrowding and other conditions of confinement make it harder to successfully treat prisoners with mental illness. Prisoners with mental illness are far more likely to suffer sexual and physical abuse at the hands of jail staff or other inmates than are inmates who do not have a mental illness. The Los Angeles County jails have been rife with such abuse for decades. Incarceration can also imperil the very lives of those with mental illness: suicide is the leading cause of death in jails, and inmates with mental illness commit suicide at much higher rates than people with mental illness living in the community.13 Indeed, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently sent a letter to Los Angeles County stating that it had found that the County was violating the constitutional rights of inmates with mental illness, noting the ten suicides by inmates in 2013, and finding that the Sheriff's Department and Department of Mental Health had failed to take adequate steps to "protect prisoners from serious harm and risk of harm at the Jails due to inadequate suicide prevention practices.' Upon release, inmates with mental illness find it even more difficult to get a job and find housing than before their incarceration because they now have a criminal record. And families suffer when their loved ones are imprisoned. Widespread incarceration of people with mental illness harms not only them and their families but also wastes precious taxpayer resources. It costs far more to incarcerate inmates with mental illness than those without mental illness, and it is far less costly to supervise them in community settings than in jail. Many communities are beginning to address the warehousing of people with mental illness in jails through collaborations between the criminal justice system and the public mental health system that "divert" people with mental illness from incarceration. Effective diversion programs ensure that people with mental illness who are arrested or end up in jail are connected to effective community-based treatment programs. Diversion can occur at any stage of the criminal process, including pre-arrest, pre-and post-booking, pre-trial, and pre-sentencing. The key to success is relying on treatment services, including Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and supportive housing, with demonstrated success in reducing recidivism (re-offending), improving mental health outcomes, and lowering costs. Diversion programs not only improve public safety and public health, but they are also consistent with the purpose of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and with the landmark decision in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), in which the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the ADA prohibits the needless institutionalization of people with mental disabilities. The DOJ has been actively promoting community-based services, especially ACT and supportive housing, as a means of preventing the needless institutionalization of people with mental illness in jails. Details: Los Angeles: ACLU of Southern California, 2014. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 20, 2015 at: https://www.aclusocal.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/JAILS-REPORT.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.aclusocal.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/JAILS-REPORT.pdf Shelf Number: 135721 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsDiversionJail InmatesJailsMentally Ill Offenders |
Author: Victoria (Australia). Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Community Correction Orders Monitoring Report Summary: The community correction order (CCO) was introduced as a sentencing option in Victoria in January 2012. The purpose of a CCO is to provide a non-custodial sentencing option that is more flexible than the orders it replaced, in particular the community-based order (CBO), the intensive correction order (ICO), and the combined custody and treatment order (CCTO). Relative to the orders that have been replaced, CCOs can be imposed for longer maximum durations in the higher courts and all courts can order a higher maximum number of hours for unpaid community work. This allows the courts to use CCOs for a wider range of offending behaviours. Also, a greater range of conditions can be attached to a CCO than to the orders it replaced. This provides the courts with increased capacity to address the specific circumstances of the offender. The new order was introduced at a time when another sentencing option, the suspended sentence of imprisonment, was being phased out. CCOs are also intended to be a replacement for suspended sentences in cases where the court considers immediate custody unnecessary to fulfil the purposes for which the sentence is imposed. In light of these sentencing reforms, this report examines three questions: 1. How have sentencers used CCOs and what are the characteristics of offenders who receive them? 2. Have CCOs only replaced CBOs and ICOs in sentencing practice? 3. To what extent, if any, have CCOs replaced suspended sentences of imprisonment in sentencing practice? The questions have been addressed in relation to the Magistrates' Court and the higher courts (the County and Supreme Courts) through analyses of relevant sentencing data. Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2014. 72p. Source: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Community%20Correction%20Orders%20Monitoring%20Report_0.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Community%20Correction%20Orders%20Monitoring%20Report_0.pdf Shelf Number: 136086 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community-Based Corrections Criminal CourtsSentencing (Australia) |
Author: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Title: Young people returning to sentenced youth justice supervision 2015 Summary: The rate of return to sentenced youth justice supervision is an indicator of the effectiveness of the services provided to young people serving supervised sentences. Around 20% of those aged 10-16 when released from sentenced community-based supervision in 2012-13 returned to sentenced supervision in 6 months, and 44% returned within 12 months. The rate of return was higher for those released from sentenced detention: 50% returned to sentenced supervision within 6 months and 76% returned within 12 months Details: Canberra: AIHW, 2015. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Juvenile Justice Series No. 18: Accessed July 29, 2015 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129551648 Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129551648 Shelf Number: 136243 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity SentencesCommunity-Based CorrectionsJuvenile OffendersRecidivism |
Author: Texas Juvenile Justice Department Title: Overview of Community-Based Juvenile Probation Programs, Part 1 Summary: The Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) Program & Services Registry was created in 2010 with the purpose of cataloging the community-based programs offered in juvenile probation departments across the state. Each juvenile probation department is required to enter information into the program registry for all active community-based programs. In addition to programs offered by the department, community-based programs include those contracted through the department and those receiving referrals from juvenile probation. Program entries provide general contact information and a description of the program and its goals. Departments must also provide information regarding duration and funding, eligibility requirements, and distinct program components. This brief will explore the information captured in the Program & Services Registry, focusing on the basics of programs offered throughout the state. It will examine program types offered, program duration, funding, and the intended attributes of juveniles to be served. While most of the data presented in this brief is presented as it is reported by departments, some information regarding program type and juveniles served has been changed to reflect recommendations made in a January 2012 program audit. This brief is the first in a series exploring the community-based programs available to juveniles involved in the juvenile justice system and the effectiveness of those programs in lowering recidivism rates. Future briefs in this series will examine the characteristics of juveniles served and outcomes for program participants. Lastly, TJJD will report on recidivism rates throughout the state and determine which programs are providing meaningful interventions and what program elements improve youth outcomes. This information will be used to assist juvenile probation departments in creating more effective programming. Details: Austin: Texas Juvenile Justice Department, 2013. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Community-Based Program Evaluation Series: Accessed August 28, 2015 at: https://www.tjjd.texas.gov/statistics/CommunityBasedJuvenileProbationPrograms.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.tjjd.texas.gov/statistics/CommunityBasedJuvenileProbationPrograms.pdf Shelf Number: 135713 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsJuvenile OffendersJuvenile Probation |
Author: Ryan, Liz Title: Notorious to Notable: The Criminal Role of the Philanthropic Community in Transforming the Juvenile Justice System in Washington, D.C. Summary: In 2000, then D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams appointed a Blue Ribbon Commission to rethink how the District of Columbia treated some of its most vulnerable residents, youth in the juvenile justice system. The Blue Ribbon Commission recommended the closure of the District's long-term youth incarceration facility, the Oak Hill Youth Center; its replacement with a smaller, homelike facility; the redirection of resources from incarceration to community- based alternatives; and a reduction in the prosecution of youth in adult criminal court. Between the years 2000 and 2011, the District's juvenile justice system went from one of the worst - with a notorious and inhumane juvenile prison, an over-reliance on incarceration, and a dearth of community programs - to one of the most notable, receiving recognition from Harvard University. The purpose of this report is to highlight the ways that the philanthropic community aided this effort. It is a story of collaboration and collective effort by local D.C. foundations and national funders that contributed to tremendous change in the treatment and outcomes for youth in D.C.'s juvenile justice system. The reforms ultimately reduced youth re-offending rates by decreasing the District's over-reliance on incarceration; closing and replacing Oak Hill with a smaller, homelike facility and an innovative and acclaimed school; and redirecting funding from incarceration to community- based alternatives. Starting with the Blue Ribbon Commission, funders supported the policy development of the Commission and subsequent policy and advocacy work of the community to ensure their recommendations became law.. Details: Washington, DC: 2011. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 17, 2015 at: https://giving.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/notorious-to-notable-final.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://giving.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/notorious-to-notable-final.pdf Shelf Number: 136796 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice SystemsJuvenile OffendersRecidivism |
Author: Andersen, Signe Hald Title: Serving time or serving the community? Exploiting a policy reform to assess the causal effects of community service on income, social benefit dependency and recidivism Summary: There is a widespread belief among criminologists, judges and the like that criminals are better off serving non-custodial sentences instead of going to prison. However, empirical evidence of the effects of community service is scarce. This paper exploits a policy reform that implemented the use of community service as punishment among specific groups of criminals in order to assess the causal effect of community service on post-sentence income, dependency on social benefits, and crime. Details: Copenhagen, Denmark: Rockwool Foundation Research Unit and University Press of Southern Denmark, 2012. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Study Paper No. 37: Accessed September 21, 2015 at: http://www.rockwoolfonden.dk/publications/law+of+the+land/publication?id=1603 Year: 2012 Country: Denmark URL: http://www.rockwoolfonden.dk/publications/law+of+the+land/publication?id=1603 Shelf Number: 124696 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity CorrectionsCommunity ServiceCommunity-Based CorrectionsRecidivism |
Author: Justice Policy Institute Title: Parole Perspectives in Maryland: A Survey of People Who Returned to Prison from Parole and Community Supervision Agents Summary: A new analysis from the Justice Policy Institute (JPI) shows the connection between efforts to reduce prison populations, connect people to work, and address the challenges of Baltimore's distressed communities. In Parole Perspectives in Maryland: A survey of people who returned to prison from parole and community supervision agents, JPI heard from the people most directly impacted by and involved with Maryland's parole practices. JPI surveyed people who returned to prison from parole and their community supervision agents to get a clearer picture of the barriers to successfully transitioning to the community from prison. About half of the people surveyed were from Baltimore City and most of the parole agents surveyed were responsible for a caseload that includes people from Baltimore City. Forty-six percent of the people who left prison and were on parole that were surveyed were from Baltimore City, and 12 percent were from Baltimore County. Details: Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 24, 2015 at: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/paroleperspectivesinmaryland.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/paroleperspectivesinmaryland.pdf Shelf Number: 136854 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsCosts of CorrectionsOffender SupervisionParoleParole RevocationsParolees |
Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Community Correction Orders Second Monitoring Report. (Pre-Guideline Judgment) Summary: The community correction order (CCO) is a recently created and important sentencing option for Victorian criminal courts. The CCO allows courts to combine a range of punitive and therapeutic conditions in a sentence that an offender serves in the community. With the recent abolition of suspended sentences of imprisonment in Victoria, the CCO is now, for some offending, the only alternative sentence to imprisonment. This report examines changes in the use of CCOs, and sentencing practices more generally, by Victorian courts during the period from January 2012 to December 2014. One of the aims of this report is to assess the effects on sentencing practices of major sentencing reforms, including the phase-out of suspended sentences and the changes adopted in September 2014 to the way CCOs may be combined with sentences of imprisonment. This report does not assess the effects on sentencing practices of the Court of Appeal's guideline judgment, which was issued at the end of this report's reference period. The guideline judgment will be the subject of future research by the Sentencing Advisory Council (the 'Council'). Details: Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 24, 2015 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Community%20Correction%20Orders%20Second%20Monitoring%20Report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Community%20Correction%20Orders%20Second%20Monitoring%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 136859 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity SentencesCommunity-Based CorrectionsSentencing Reform |
Author: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Title: Pathways through youth justice supervision: further analyses Summary: This report looks at the complete youth justice supervision history of 24,102 young people in Australia, who experienced supervision, both in the community and in detention, between 1 July 2000 and 30 June 2014 when they were aged 10-17. More than one-third (37%) of young people experienced the most common pathway of sentenced community-based supervision only. Young people spent a median of 303 days (about 10 months) under supervision in total, and completed a median of 2 periods of supervision. About 11% of young people had a pathway that was considered 'extensive', and these young people accounted for about one-third (32%) of the total days of supervision and nearly half (45%) of all supervision periods. Details: Canberra: AIHW, 2015. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Juvenile Justice Series No. 19: Accessed October 15, 2015 at: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129553111 Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129553111 Shelf Number: 136982 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsJuvenile Offender SupervisionJuvenile OffendersJuvenile ProbationYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Dryden, Ruth Title: Evaluation of sixteen women's community justice services in Scotland Summary: In 2013-15, the Scottish Government funded 16 projects proposed by criminal justice partners across Scotland to develop community services for women who offend. Developments were based on existing service provision and to ensure changes could be sustained locally at the end of the funding. Funding varied in amount and timeframes. Most of the projects were undertaken by local authority criminal justice social work (CJSW) departments with partner providers, including public and third sector agencies. The national evaluation examined how the 16 women's community justice services (WCJSs) were implemented and to what extent they contributed towards positive outcomes for women. A further aim was to build local capacity for self-evaluation in WCJSs. Findings were drawn from two phases of interviews with practitioners and women, secondary documents, and quantitative data for 1,778 women who were in the WCJSs between April and December 2014. This included outcomes data for 406 women. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government, 2015. 137p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00484398.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00484398.pdf Shelf Number: 137319 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity SentencesCommunity ServiceCommunity-Based CorrectionsFemale Offenders |
Author: Liddell Thomson Consultancy Title: The Future of the Female Custodial Estate Summary: In January 2015, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice announced that the proposed new women's prison at HMP Inverclyde would not proceed: "I've decided that the current plans for a prison for women in Inverclyde should not go ahead. It does not fit with my vision of how a modern and progressive country should be addressing female offendin. I believe we should be investing in smaller regional and community-based custodial facilities across the country, rather than a large new prison for women." Michael Matheson, Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Scottish Government Following this announcement, the Scottish Government and Scottish Prison Service developed an early proposition for the future of the female custodial estate which reflected the Cabinet Secretary's comments and the recommendations of The Commission on Women Offenders chaired by The Right Hon Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC. This proposition includes: A national unit Regional units for the West, East and North Community-based Residential Units Young women accommodated separately from the adult population In March 2015, the Scottish Government asked each of the eight Community Justice Authorities to host a regional consultation workshop in their local area. While CJAs were asked to ensure that key stakeholders from across a number of sectors were invited to attend, the events were also open to anyone interested in discussing the early detail of the proposed model for the future of the female custodial estate. These well-attended events were held in the following locations: Glasgow, Greenock, Inverness, Dundee, Airdrie, Dalkeith, Dunfermline, and Kilmarnock. Separate sessions were held with women in custody and with Scottish Prison Service staff. The views of the families and friends of women in custody were sought by telephone or face-to-face conversations conducted by Families Outside and the Shine Women's Mentoring Service. This was managed separately from the wider consultation events. More than 600 people across Scotland took part in these animated discussions, bringing their expertise, experience and passion for improving the lives of women in custody. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government, 2015. Source: Internet Resource: Consultation Report: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00487229.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00487229.pdf Shelf Number: 137320 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsFemale InmatesFemale Offenders |
Author: RMIT University Title: Evaluation of the Redevelopment of Community Correctional Services: Final Report Summary: Community corrections in Victoria instigated the Corrections Long Term Management Strategy (CLTMS) in 2001.The Reducing Re-offending Strategy was a component of CLTMS and was designed to guide correctional policy and practice over the next decade. A major feature of the Reducing Re-offending Strategy was the Redevelopment of Community Correctional Services (CCS). Within the available funding, 42.3 million dollars was allocated to the Redevelopment of Community Correctional Services. The Redevelopment was initiated to strengthen the capacity of Community Correctional Services to manage offenders and to reduce the number of prison beds. There were three compelling reasons that this was necessary: - The prison system was under enormous pressure due to a dramatic rise in prison numbers; - There was a financial imperative to expand community corrections as a more cost effective alternative to prison and there was a need for a greater range of sentencing options; - There was a growing evidence base that community correctional services had more potential to assist offender rehabilitation and reduce re-offending than a custodial sentence. A key indicator of success was an increase in substitution from prison to community based correctional services with an anticipated reduction of 350 prison beds over the four year period of implementation. The intended longer term outcome of the implementation of Redevelopment was a reduction in re-offending. Details: Melbourne: RMIT University, 2005. 124p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 25, 2016 at: https://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/19ef8778-54fe-4660-b203-6dfa1ec7d33e/evaluation_redevelopment_community_correctional_services_final_report.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Australia URL: https://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/19ef8778-54fe-4660-b203-6dfa1ec7d33e/evaluation_redevelopment_community_correctional_services_final_report.pdf Shelf Number: 137974 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity CorrectionsCommunity-Based CorrectionsOffender RehabilitationRecidivismReoffending |
Author: Deal, Teri Title: Measuring Subsequent Offending in Juvenile Probation Summary: NCJJ has released a new StateScan publication that summarizes the results of a review of publicly available recidivism reports that include measures of recidivism for youth adjudicated to probation. This StateScan is the 6th in a series that distills important knowledge from NCJJ's Juvenile Justice Geography, Policy, Practice & Statistics website (www.JJGPS.org). The authors organize results from an online search for available state-level recidivism reports. Most reports located focused on juvenile correction populations, but 14 reports included measures of reoffending for youth under probation supervision. This publication explores the different ways reoffending is measured for this population, including the various marker events and follow-up periods used. This original analysis also emphasizes the need to measure reoffending among probationers given that most court involved youth are supervised by probation departments Details: Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2015. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: STATESCAN: Accessed March 7, 2016 at: http://www.ncjj.org/pdf/JJGPS%20StateScan/JJGPS%20Measuring%20Subsequent%20Offending%20in%20Juvenile%20Probation%202015_6.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjj.org/pdf/JJGPS%20StateScan/JJGPS%20Measuring%20Subsequent%20Offending%20in%20Juvenile%20Probation%202015_6.pdf Shelf Number: 138122 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsJuvenile OffendersJuvenile ProbationRecidivism |
Author: Reid Howie Associates Title: Community Facing Prisons Report Summary: 1.1 This report presents the findings of research into community facing prisons which was carried out by Reid Howie Associates for the SPS between March and August 2015. 1.2 The purpose of the study, as set out in the brief from the SPS, was to focus on three prisons identified as "community facing": Addiewell; Low Moss; and Grampian1. The aim was, from the experience in these prisons: "To understand in what practical and demonstrable ways the prisons are embracing and implementing the new community facing operating paradigm in terms of throughcare and support." 1.3 The brief specified that the research should seek to understand better: - In what practical and demonstrable ways a community facing prison is providing a new model for penal practice? - While service provision purports to be community orientated, what is being delivered in practice? - In what ways can we measure the community facing element? - How can we measure that what is being done differently is having an actual (positive) impact on those involved? - What is demonstrably new about the community facing method? 1.4 The research process involved extensive discussions with senior management, staff, other organisations and people in custody in the three prisons. Discussions were also held with staff in Perth and Greenock prisons for comparison. The information gathered was entirely qualitative, to reflect the purposes of the research, and a very large amount of detailed material was gathered. It is clearly impossible, in this report, to describe all aspects of each of the prisons. Instead, common themes relevant to the research questions are identified, illustrated with examples from each establishment. 1.5 This report summarises the findings in five sections. This section provides an introduction to the research, and outlines the background to the concept of "community facing prisons." Section 2 identifies participants' views of the key features of a community facing prison. Section 3 examines how the model has been implemented, and how it is being delivered in practice. Section 4 summarises the perceived benefits and limitations of the current approach (on the basis of participants' experiences), and some of the key challenges faced. The final section sets out a number of conclusions and points to note arising from the research. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Prison Service, 2015. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2016 at: http://www.sps.gov.uk/Corporate/Publications/Publication-3919.aspx Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.sps.gov.uk/Corporate/Publications/Publication-3919.aspx Shelf Number: 138392 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsCorrectional InstitutionsPrisons |
Author: Caudill, Jonathan W. Title: Navigating the Storm: An Empirical Assessment of the Local Effects of California's Criminal Justice Realignment Summary: October 1st of 2014 marked the third-year implementation anniversary of California's Criminal Justice Realignment (AB 109) legislation. California's AB 109 realigned sentencing options for certain non-violent, non-sexual, and non-serious felony offenses, precluding incarceration in state prison. This less punishment, more rehabilitation sentencing structure shifted correctional supervision to county criminal justice systems (namely, county jails and probation departments) across the State. Along with this widespread jurisdictional decentralization, came many concerns regarding the impact of such a dramatic shift in correctional supervision. Reported here are the results of a three-year evaluation that uniquely included both quantitative and qualitative research methods to assess the impact of AB 109 on Butte County criminal justice organizations. First examined is the change in workload for the District Attorney's Office, focusing on outcomes such as the number of case filings by specific offense categories, failure to appear charge accumulation, and total number of charges over time. Second, this report demonstrates through comparison of recidivism outcomes of pre-AB 109 offenders to recidivism outcomes of post-AB 109 offenders a continuity of supervision during the implementation of Realignment. Results here also highlight factors that increased the likelihood of new arrests and/or probation violations for probation offenders. The empirical work then turns to a small cohort of Post-Release Community Supervision (PCS) offenders. These PCS offenders were tracked for three years to better understand their recidivism outcomes and impact on the local criminal justice system. Their cumulative impact on the jail and overall recidivism was assessed through exploring their total number of times entering the county jail, the proportion of those bookings that turned into formalized charges, and the proportion of those charges that ultimately became convictions. Finally, the report presents findings from two qualitative studies: the level of service orientation across supervision organizations and offenders' perceptions of the utility of home visits' Details: Chico, CA: California State University, Chico, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 8, 2016 at: https://www.csuchico.edu/pols/documents/Navigating%20the%20storm%20three%20years%20after%20109.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.csuchico.edu/pols/documents/Navigating%20the%20storm%20three%20years%20after%20109.pdf Shelf Number: 139318 Keywords: Community SupervisionCommunity-Based CorrectionsCriminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformProbationersPublic Safety RealignmentRecidivism |
Author: Sperber, Kimberly Gentry Title: Factors Influencing Medication-Assisted Treatment in Ohio Halfway Houses and Community-Based Correctional Facilities Summary: Recent years have witnessed an alarming increase in the number of people dependent on opiates. Nationally, opiate overdose is the second leading cause of injury related death, surpassed only by car accidents. In Ohio, accidental overdoses has been the leading cause of death since 2007. In fact, there has been a 472% increase in drug overdose deaths from 1999 to 2013. An increase in opiate dependent people means that community corrections programs are seeing a dramatic increase in admissions of opiate dependent offenders. This is not surprising given that the link between opiate use and crime is well established. The Center for Health and Human Services Research at Talbert House completed a study based on previous National Institutes of Health studies that have examined: (1) barriers to MAT within private and public substance abuse treatment programs and (2) counselor attitudes toward MAT. This study was replicated in halfway houses and Community Based Correctional Facilities (CBCF) across Ohio and assesses attitudes of both treatment and security staff in these programs. All Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections (ODRC)-funded halfway houses and CBCFs were invited to participate in the study. All but two programs elected to participate. Data were collected through two mechanisms. The first was an in-depth structured, face-to-face interview with key staff including Program Directors, Clinical Supervisors, a representative of the medical staff, and at least two clinical/direct service staff. An interview guide was used to gather information on key independent variables within a number of domains. Examples of these domains include organizational structure, organizational resources, dominant treatment philosophy and types of services offered, availability of medical personnel, funding sources, exposure to and understanding of MAT research findings, referral source support for MAT, staff support for MAT, concerns associated with providing MAT to offenders, and client characteristics. A total of 181 staff participated in interviews for this study. The second mechanism was the administration of anonymous surveys to all staff at each facility. These surveys assessed knowledge about MAT, beliefs about the effectiveness and appropriateness of MAT for offenders, and endorsement of myths about MAT. 1876 surveys were distributed, and 910 were returned for a response rate of 49%. Interview and survey questions asked about MAT in general as well as about specific medications (e.g., methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone), where appropriate. Survey items were rated on a Likert scale. Major Findings A total of 49 facilities participated in the study. Interviews with the Program Directors of these facilities demonstrated that 17 of the programs did not allow any access to MAT at the time of the interview while 13 programs directly prescribed addiction medication to clients with opioid disorders, and an additional 19 programs allowed clients to access addiction medications through an external provider during their stay in the facility. Of the 13 programs providing MAT, 62% prescribed oral naltrexone, 46% prescribed injectable naltrexone, and 62% prescribed buprenorphine. No programs prescribed or allowed access to methadone. While many programs had begun to implement various forms of MAT, interview results showed that the programs faced a number of barriers to implementing comprehensive MAT services including: infrastructure, financial, workforce development, and stakeholder support. 63.3% of the facilities did not have access to medically supervised detoxification services for the clients they serve. Response patterns indicated financial barriers to hiring medical staff. Respondents indicated difficulties finding medical staff willing to provide services within correctional programs and with the appropriate experiences for treating a criminal justice population, particularly those with substance use disorders. 83% of the Program Directors agree that the Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (OHMAS) is supportive of the use of medications for treating substance abuse in community corrections settings. However, less than 40% of the Program Directors agreed that OHMAS had adequately disseminated information about how to implement MAT in community corrections programs or that OHMAS had offered sufficient training opportunities about using medications to treat substance abuse. The primary method staff use to learn about MAT is having conversations with staff of other substance abuse treatment organizations. Survey data were used to assess staff beliefs about general treatment approaches for clients with addiction disorders, beliefs about MAT for clients with addiction disorders, and beliefs about the outcomes of MAT. Regarding overall treatment philosophy, survey responses demonstrated an overall pattern of clinical staff providing significantly higher ratings on items reflective of cognitive-behavioral and motivational enhancement approaches, and operations staff providing significantly higher ratings on items reflective of 12-step approaches and more confrontational approaches. Regarding concerns with MAT, the consistent pattern was that operational staff were more likely to agree with a series of negative statements, such “Using medications to treat addiction is substituting one drug for another” or “Medications are drugs and you cannot be clean if you are taking drugs.” Operations staff provided a statistically significantly lower endorsement of agreement to the item “I have received adequate information about the effects of using medication-assisted treatment for offender populations.” Operations staff also provided significantly lower ratings of agreement than supervisory and clinical staff on items that reflected benefits of MAT, such as MAT reduces relapse, increases employment, reduces crime, reduces or blocks the effects of opioids, increases family stability, and improves birth outcomes for children born to addicted mothers. On the other hand, they provided significantly higher ratings of agreement to items indicating beliefs about negative outcomes of MAT, such as MAT rewards criminals for being drug users and interferes with the ability to drive a car. In the surveys, we also asked staff about their perceptions of the acceptability and effectiveness of four medications used to treat opioid disorders: buprenorphine, methadone, oral naltrexone, and injectable naltrexone. Since previous studies have found that lack of information about medication effectiveness serves as a barrier to its implementation, we also sought to examine the extent of knowledge diffusion regarding each medication. We operationalized diffusion as a dichotomous variable. This variable was coded based on the response to the item “Based on your knowledge and personal experience, to what extent do you consider each of the following treatment techniques to be effective?” Answering “I don’t know” was coded as a lack of diffusion, while all other ratings were considered as evidence of diffusion. Finally, we sought to identify predictors of knowledge diffusion, endorsements of acceptability, and endorsements of effectiveness. Results are summarized below: 35.1% did not know the effectiveness of buprenorphine, 37.2% did not know the effectiveness of methadone, 55.4% did not know the effectiveness of oral naltrexone, and 44% did not know the effectiveness of injectable naltrexone. This trend is consistent with the amount of time these medications have been in use within the field of community corrections in Ohio. Staff perceived methadone and buprenorphine as less effective than both oral and injectable naltrexone, with the highest rating of effectiveness assigned to injectable naltrexone. Regarding acceptability, the results show the same trend, with staff rating methadone and buprenorphine as less acceptable than both forms of naltrexone. Again, injectable naltrexone received the highest endorsement of acceptability. Operations staff were more likely to provide a “don’t know” response regarding the effectiveness all four medications (see Table 1.). On the other hand, staff who worked in programs that provided access to MAT (rather than directly providing MAT) were more likely to endorse an opinion about all four medications. Staff who agreed that they had received adequate information about the effects of using MAT with offender populations also had an increased likelihood of endorsing an opinion about the effectiveness of all four medications. Staff and agency characteristics did not consistently predict perceived acceptability across the four medications (see Table 2.). Predictors that were somewhat consistent across models included staff beliefs about outcomes of MAT, whether the facility directly provided MAT, and staff concerns about MAT. Specifically, staff who demonstrated a higher level of agreement with positive statements indicating positive outcomes of MAT were significantly more likely to endorse the use of buprenorphine, oral naltrexone, and injectable naltrexone as acceptable. While direct provision of MAT served to increase the probability that staff would rate oral and injectable naltrexone as acceptable, it served to decrease the probability that staff would endorse methadone as acceptable. The only consistent predictor of perceived effectiveness across all four medications was staff beliefs regarding the positive outcomes of MAT (see Table 3.). Higher average ratings on these beliefs resulted in statistically significant increases in the probability that staff would agree that the medication was effective. Details: Columbus, OH: Center for Health & Human Services Research, 2016. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 8, 2016 at: http://www.publicsafety.ohio.gov/links/MAT_CBCFs_Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.publicsafety.ohio.gov/links/MAT_CBCFs_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 145616 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsDrug Abuse and AddictionDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug OffendersDrug TreatmentHalfway HousesSubstance Abuse Treatment |
Author: Queensland. Department of Premier and Cabinet Title: Queensland Parole System Review: Final Report Summary: The Honourable Annastacia Palaszczuk MP, Premier and Minister for the Arts and the Honourable Bill Byrne MP, Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services and Minister for Corrective Services established a review into the parole system in Queensland. Mr Walter Sofronoff QC was appointed to lead the review. The review sought input from victims' organisations, organisations working with offenders, academic researchers and experts, interested members of the public and persons working in the criminal justice system. A report including findings and recommendations was provided to the Premier and Minister for the Arts and the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services and Minister for Corrective Services on 1 December 2016. Details: Brisbane: Queensland Government, 2016. 362p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 6, 2017 at: https://parolereview.premiers.qld.gov.au/assets/queensland-parole-system-review-final-report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://parolereview.premiers.qld.gov.au/assets/queensland-parole-system-review-final-report.pdf Shelf Number: 141348 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsCorrectional AdministrationParoleRecidivismReoffending |
Author: Muldrow, Dianna Title: Texas' Regionalization of the Juvenile Justice System Summary: Research has shown that youth in the juvenile justice system have improved later outcomes when supervised near their communities and families than comparable youth who were placed in state-run facilities. SB 1630 orders the creation of a plan by TJJD to divert all juveniles who can be effectively monitored in their communities away from expensive state-run facilities. The created plan shows a desire to protect public safety and improve the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders Details: Austin: Texas Public Policy Foundation, 2017. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Perspective: Accessed march 21, 2017 at: http://www.texaspolicy.com/library/doclib/2016-11-PP25-RegionalizationJuvJustice-CEJ-DiannaMuldrow-copy.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.texaspolicy.com/library/doclib/2016-11-PP25-RegionalizationJuvJustice-CEJ-DiannaMuldrow-copy.pdf Shelf Number: 144543 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsJuvenile Justice Reform Juvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Victoria. Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Contravention of Community Correction Orders Summary: The community correction order (CCO) is a sentencing order that provides for an offender's punishment and rehabilitation in the community. An offender's failure to comply with a CCO without a reasonable excuse is a criminal offence with a maximum penalty of three months' imprisonment. CCOs became available as a sentencing option in Victoria on 16 January 2012, replacing a number of community orders, such as the community-based order and the intensive correction order, and coinciding with the progressive phasing out of suspended sentences of imprisonment. Previously, sentencing courts had a suite of community orders of increasing severity sitting below imprisonment. In contrast, the CCO is designed as a single order that a court can make more or less severe through the length of the order and the conditions attached to it. CCOs may also be combined with a sentence of imprisonment (a 'combined order'), making them an option for serious offences. Since the introduction of CCOs, there has been considerable research into their use, which has increased substantially, and into the effect of subsequent changes to sentencing law and practice, which have been extensive. However, there has been very little research into offenders' compliance with their CCOs. Quantifying the proportion of offenders who contravene their CCOs, including by further offending, is a first step to understanding whether CCOs are operating effectively. Similarly, identifying factors that might be associated with contravention and analysing the courts' responses to contraventions are important aspects of understanding how the orders are working in practice. This report assesses how many offenders contravene their CCO by committing a new imprisonable offence or by failing to comply with another term or condition of the CCO, such as failing to turn up for community work. The report also assesses factors associated with, and court responses to, contraventions. In this report, an offender is classified as having contravened their CCO if they have been sentenced for: - a charge of contravening a CCO (under section 83AD of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)); and/or - a separate imprisonable offence committed while on their CCO. This report is confined to contraventions that are proven and sentenced in court and therefore excludes contraventions dealt with administratively by Corrections Victoria. This means that, in this report, the proportion of offenders found to have contravened their CCO may underestimate the true rate of non-compliance. The report focuses on all offenders in Victoria who received a CCO from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013: a total of 7,645 offenders. Using sentencing data, the Council tracked each offender's proven offending activity while their CCO was in operation to 30 June 2016. Details: Melbourne: The Council, 2017. 116p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 4, 2017 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Contravention_of_Community_Correction_Orders.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Contravention_of_Community_Correction_Orders.pdf Shelf Number: 146718 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Corrections Community-Based CorrectionsSentencing |
Author: Wang, Joanna JJ Title: Intensive corrections orders versus short prison sentence: A comparison of re-offending Summary: Aim: To compare reoffending rates between those who received an intensive correction order (ICO) and those who received short prison sentence (less than two years). Method: Offenders' demographic characteristics, index offence characteristics, prior convictions and penalties, LSI-R score and re-offences were extracted from the Re-offending Database maintained by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Using logistic regression model with inverse probability of treatment weighting, the effect of penalty choice on re-offending was estimated. Doubly robust estimation and bivariate probit model with an instrumental variable were also used to address potential model misspecification and endogeneity of penalty assignment. As a sensitivity analysis, separate modelling was performed for offenders who were in medium to high risk categories and the prison group was restricted to those with 6 months or less fixed term. Results: There was a 11%-31% reduction in the odds of re-offending for an offender who received an ICO compared with an offender who received a prison sentence of up to 24 months. The bivariate probit model with an instrumental variable did not reveal a significant effect or evidence of endogeneity. Conclusion: These results further strengthen the evidence base suggesting that supervision combined with rehabilitation programs can have a significant impact on reoffending rates Details: Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 207: Accessed October 19, 2017 at: http://apo.org.au/system/files/113866/apo-nid113866-449821.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/system/files/113866/apo-nid113866-449821.pdf Shelf Number: 147729 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-based CorrectionsIntensive SupervisionRecidivismReoffending |
Author: Shames, Alison Title: Remote Access: Using Video Technology to Treat Substance Users on Probation and Parole in South Dakota Summary: The challenges of accessing services for alcohol and other drug use in South Dakota may have contributed to the state's high percentage of people convicted of low-level nonviolent offenses, particularly for drug or alcohol related offenses. To minimize these challenges, especially for parolees and probationers residing in the state's vast rural areas, the state worked with local providers to pilot a teleconferencing program aimed at connecting people to community-based services without the cost and barrier of transportation or other access issues. This brief describes the issues people on parole or probation encounter and the solutions the state developed to address them. It is the second brief in a series of three that focuses on the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI) - an initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), in partnership with the Pew Charitable Trusts. JRI is a data-driven approach to improve public safety, examine corrections and related criminal justice spending, manage and allocate criminal justice populations in a more cost-effective manner, and reinvest savings in strategies that can hold system-involved people accountable, decrease crime, and strengthen neighborhoods. At least 30 states have engaged in this process. Key Takeaway How South Dakota overcame the challenge of delivering treatment services across vast distances may serve as a guide for interested jurisdictions facing similar issues and hoping to start a similar program. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2016. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Brief: Accessed November 7, 2017 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/remote-access-video-technology-probation-parole-substance-users-south-dakota/legacy_downloads/Remote-access-using-video-technology-to-treat-substance-users-south-dakota-web-v2.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/remote-access-video-technology-probation-parole-substance-users-south-dakota/legacy_downloads/Remote-access-using-video-technology-to-treat-substance-users Shelf Number: 148070 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsOffender SupervisionParoleesProbationersSubstance Abuse TreatmentVideo Technology |
Author: Staley, Kristen Title: There's No Place Like Home: ]Making the case for wise investment in juvenile justice Summary: National data shows that 44 states have reduced the number of youth in residential placement and secure detention on and are increasing community-based programs because they cost less, decrease reoffending, and improve youth and family well- being. At the same me, incidences of violent youth crime are plummeting dramatically across the country. Michigan is among the states experiencing a decline in out-of-home placement. Within the past decade, the state has transformed its juvenile justice system away from harsh, punitive treatment into one celebrated for innovation and effectiveness. Details: Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Council on Crime and Delinquency, 2013. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 5, 2017 at: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/03cb01_314cc9cf69154f0ab8bba66b9323d826.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/03cb01_314cc9cf69154f0ab8bba66b9323d826.pdf Shelf Number: 148715 Keywords: Community-Based CorrectionsJuvenile Justice Reform Juvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: Enforcement and Recall: A thematic inspection Summary: Introduction -- Good-quality case management should underpin effective decisions on enforcement and recall. We expect responsible officers to be able to assess risk of harm, risk of reoffending and individuals' needs. They should be able to plan work, implement or facilitate structured programmes of work and review the progress of that work. This should all be done in a way that is sensitive to the diverse backgrounds and needs of those under probation supervision, and that builds on identified strengths in a person's life. Evidence from effective practice and desistance theories suggests that these approaches provide the best platform for successful rehabilitation7 Our findings - Community Rehabilitation Companies Community orders and suspended sentence supervision orders Overall, the quality of offender management and consequent enforcement decision-making in our sample of community orders and suspended sentence orders was poor. Assessment was too often deficient. Plans, though timely, were not of good quality. Engagement with the individual in constructive work was insufficient in too many cases. Planned levels of contact were not always adequate to meet the individual's needs. Consequently, CRCs did not always know when enforcement was appropriate. The task of building a competent workforce was constrained by the level of resourcing, with dwindling front-line resources to manage the work. Licence recall We found better work in licence cases. We cannot be definitive about why that is, but we noted that the majority of the individuals were assessed as posing a medium risk of harm to others, and so were more likely to be allocated to an experienced member of staff at probation officer grade. We found that staff were clearer about the process for recall than for community enforcement. Overall, the quality of assessment and planning was sufficient. The programmes of work then delivered should have been better tailored to reducing the risk posed to the public and the likelihood of reoffending, but in almost all cases the level of contact met the requirements of the licence. Recall decision-making was good. Judgements about the acceptability of absences or individual behaviour were generally appropriate. Post-sentence supervision We looked at a small sample of post-sentence supervision cases. Overall, the quality of case management and consequent enforcement decision-making in the sample of post-sentence supervision was poor. We found that CRCs were struggling to provide adequate services for the range of complex needs of this group of individuals. In particular, responsible officers struggled to find ways to engage with them. Enforcement had the effect of compounding rather than lessening the sense of a revolving door between prison and the community. Our findings - National Probation Service Community order and suspended sentence supervision orders Overall, the quality of assessment, supervision planning and consequent enforcement decision-making was good. At the beginning of the community sentence, responsible officers outlined to individuals the consequences of non-compliance, including a return to court. Judgements about the acceptability of absences or individual behaviour were appropriate in most cases. However, better attention should have been paid to engaging individuals in the process of supervision. While staff had a heightened sensitivity to issues of risk, the level of contact set was based on considerations of the risk of harm posed to others in just under two-thirds of cases. Overall, we found a good balance struck between purposeful work and the use of enforcement to re-engage individuals or to apply controls on behaviour when necessary. Licence recall Overall, the quality of case management and consequent enforcement decisionmaking was good. The NPS had an organisation-wide process for managing these cases. This supported engagement and promoted compliance, and enabled staff to take recall action when necessary and appropriate. More needed to be done to ensure that relevant information from the prison is incorporated into the plan of work undertaken in the community. Nevertheless, we considered that judgements about the acceptability of absences or behaviour were appropriate in all but one case. We also found that senior managers had applied sufficient checks and balances to ensure that recall was viewed as a last resort, with action only taken when the risks of continued supervision in the community were unmanageable. Post-sentence supervision We looked at a small sample of post-sentence supervision cases. Overall, the quality of case management and consequent enforcement decision-making was good. Are women treated differently? Within CRCs we found some evidence that staff responded positively to women's needs, but this was far from consistent. The identification of women-specific issues was better at the NPS. However, both had very limited access to appropriate womenonly provision. Details: Manchester, UK: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2018. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2018 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/02/Enforcement-and-Recall-report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/02/Enforcement-and-Recall-report.pdf Shelf Number: 149480 Keywords: Case ManagementCommunity OrdersCommunity-Based CorrectionsOffender SupervisionProbation OfficersProbationers |
Author: Juvenile Justice Initiative Title: Detention of Juveniles in Illinois: Recommendations to Right-Size Detention through Reforms and Fiscal Incentives to Develop Community-Based Alternatives. Summary: Juvenile Detention is jail for kids. Research consistently reveals that even short stays in a juvenile detention facility has negative outcomes, including behavioral heath impacts and education disruptions. The studies also consistently reveal that detention actually increases repeat offending. Yet, state dollars support and encourage the use of detention, by subsidizing detention staff. There is no state plan or fiscal investment to encourage the use of alternatives to detention, despite better outcomes for fewer dollars. Despite the lack of state encouragement, several of the larger counties incorporated policies and practices to reduce reliance on costly out-of-home detention. The results are highly encouraging - lower costs with better outcome and more public safety. It is time for Illinois to encourage all counties with a detention center to make similar shifts by encouraging the development of fiscal incentives for alternatives to detention, thereby reducing the reliance on juvenile detention and making it a last resort. This report examines the current use of juvenile detention across Illinois, reviews research on the impact from detention of juveniles, and reports on the current state fiscal, oversight and administrative involvement in juvenile detention. The report examines best practices in Illinois and across the nation. Finally, this report includes a series of recommendations to "right-size" juvenile detention in Illinois. Details: Evanston, ILL: The Initiative, 2018. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 7, 2018 at: http://jjustice.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/JJI-Detention-Report-April-25-2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://jjustice.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/JJI-Detention-Report-April-25-2018.pdf Shelf Number: 140077 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsJuvenile DetentionJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Weissman, Marsha Title: Does Keeping Youth Close to Home Really Matter? A Case Study Summary: Background In 2012, with authorization from the Governor and New York State legislature, New York City took jurisdiction over children adjudicated delinquent (JDs) and ordered into placement by the court. Known as the Close to Home initiative (C2H), when youth from New York City are placed, it is now in small facilities near their home communities. C2H also expanded community-based, non-residential alternative to placement resources and required that the city's Probation Department utilize a risk-based system for making recommendations to the court. By keeping youth "close to home," it was theorized, they would remain connected to their families, their schools, and positive community activities, rather than being disconnected by placement in youth prisons distant from their homes. By 2016, New York City no longer had any JD-adjudicated youth in state Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) facilities. The 182 youth who were placed out-of-home were placed into small (6 to 18 bed) C2H facilities in or near the city. In addition, the overall placements of youth dramatically declined following the implementation of C2H. Between 2012 and 2016, overall placements of JDs decreased by 68 percent. Through interviews with stakeholders involved in the planning, implementation and advocacy for C2H, and analysis of C2H and other juvenile justice outcome data from city and state sources, this case study documents the impact of the Close to Home initiative. It examines what Close to Home and other city juvenile justice reforms that preceded it represent within the larger context of juvenile justice reforms - at the national, state and city level. Details: Syracuse, NY: Columbia University Justice Lab, 2018. 5p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 17, 2019 at: http://justicelab.iserp.columbia.edu/img/forum_handout_final_3.12.18.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://justicelab.iserp.columbia.edu/closetohome.html Shelf Number: 154204 Keywords: At-Risk YouthClose to Home InitiativeCommunity-Based CorrectionsJuvenile DelinquentsJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile OffendersRisk-Based System |
Author: Weissman, Marsha Title: Moving Beyond Youth Prisons: Lessons from New York City's Implementation of Close to Home Summary: In the mid-1990s, New York's youth prison system reflected the dominant paradigm across the country - a heavy reliance on incarceration for young people caught up in the juvenile justice system. During this time, roughly 3,800 youth convicted of crimes annually were sent to large facilities, operated either by the New York State Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) or by private providers contracted by OCFS. These facilities were largely located in upstate New York, far from youths' homes and communities, particularly for youth from New York City (Sickmund et al. 2017; New York State (NYS) Office of the State Comptroller 2001). Upon returning home from these placements, youth often felt disconnected, resulting in poor outcomes. A 2009 study indicated that by age 28, 71 percent of boys released from New York State's juvenile placement system spent some time in an adult jail or prison (Coleman, Do Han Kim & Therese 2009). Fast forward twenty years, and things in New York looked dramatically different. By 2016, New York City no longer sent any youth from its Family Court to state-operated youth prisons. Today, only around 100 New York City youth are placed from Family Court into any kind of residential facility, about a dozen of whom are in a locked facility.3 Not only are there dramatically fewer youth in residential placements, but those who do get placed now go to smaller, more home-like settings that attend to public safety without mirroring the punitive, correctional approaches embodied by previous youth prisons. This case study outlines what happened in the intervening years to achieve these remarkable results. By sharing New York City's story, we offer a roadmap for other jurisdictions looking to realign their juvenile justice systems, adapting the lessons learned about what worked and what did not to meet their specific circumstances. Close to Home (C2H), the initiative that transferred the care and custody of all New York City youth adjudicated as juvenile delinquents from the State to the City, was embedded in a set of reforms that involved policing, detention, and developments in science and evidence-based interventions. While the astronomical costs of the system played an important role, the commitment by key stakeholders to create a developmentally appropriate system without sacrificing public safety and adhering to a shared set of principles and values were key to the system's transformation. This case study describes the development of the Close to Home (C2H) initiative, beginning with a review of what the system looked like before its creation, through the planning and implementation phases of this transformation. It reviews the challenges faced, particularly during C2H's initial implementation, how these were addressed, and the ongoing efforts to adapt the initiative to new and evolving circumstances. Finally, it shares data showing outcomes to date and highlights the role of key stakeholders, including elected officials, policymakers, advocates, and directly-impacted communities that combined to make the C2H reform successful. Details: New York: Columbia University, Justice Lab, 2019. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 6, 2019 at: https://justicelab.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/content/Moving%20Beyond%20Youth%20Prisons%20-%20C2H_0.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://justicelab.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/content/Moving%20Beyond%20Youth%20Prisons%20-%20C2H_0.pdf Shelf Number: 154832 Keywords: Close to Home InitiativeCommunity-Based CorrectionsJuvenile CorrectionsJuvenile DetentionJuvenile JusticeJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Center for Health and Justice at TASC Title: No Entry: A Survey of Prosecutorial Diversion in Illinois Summary: "No Entry: A Survey of Prosecutorial Diversion in Illinois," presents information collected on program authorization, oversight, target populations, goals, structure, services, outcomes, and evaluation. It offers observations and recommendations intended to guide criminal justice practitioners and other stakeholders in the development, implementation, expansion, replication, and improvement of diversion programs. As criminal justice reform efforts take hold across the country, diversion programs and initiatives operating at the front end of the justice system represent one of the most promising reform strategies. In these interventions, criminal justice system practitioners work in partnership with stakeholders to deflect and redirect eligible individuals out of the system and into community-based services. They stand in contrast to decades of public policies and practices that have resulted in record incarceration rates, unsustainable costs, and long-lasting collateral consequences harming generations of families and communities. In some programs and initiatives, diversion from the system can occur without even the logging of an arrest. In others, prosecution or sentencing is deferred while participants engage in supervised programming, and charges are dropped when it is completed successfully. By intervening early, caseloads and jail days can be reduced, criminal records can be prevented, and access to services that put men and women on the path to health and stability can be accelerated. Diversion can prevent the costs and harmful collateral consequences-to the justice system, the community, and the individual-of repeated arrests, convictions, and incarcerations. A variety of diversion models and approaches have been implemented, and some have been researched and evaluated with regard to effectiveness and impact. Local jurisdictions seeking to apply effective interventions that meet their needs to improve outcomes and spend resources wisely are increasingly incorporating risk-need-responsitivity principles designed to identify the needs of individuals that, if effectively addressed, would reduce re-offending. As jurisdictions take steps to address recidivism and the nexus between drug use, mental illness, and criminal behavior, and as the body of knowledge on these programs continues to expand, practitioners are becoming more versed in a variety of critical issues that have surfaced in national conversations and must be considered locally. Building on its 2013 report, No Entry: A National Survey of Criminal Justice Diversion Programs and Initiatives, and in recognition of the many diversion programs that have emerged under the strong and innovative leadership of local prosecutors, TASC's Center for Health and Justice (CHJ) set out to explore more deeply the landscape of prosecutorial diversion in Illinois, and specifically that which affords adults an opportunity to be accountable for their behavior without the imposition of a criminal conviction on public record. To that end, between May and December 2015, project staff conducted a survey among prosecutors of diversion programs, practices, and initiatives operating in counties across the state, with an aim of informing program development, implementation of best and innovative practices, collaboration and knowledge exchange, and policy change designed to generate cost savings and achieve public health and safety goals. The project focused on prosecutors because of their unique position to convene partnerships and build collaborative solutions to local criminal justice problems, and because of their flexibility to influence and implement policies and strategies appropriate for the populations and crime patterns of their jurisdictions. A number of observations emerged from the survey analysis: 1. Programs define their goals not only through treatment and justice lenses, but also through individual and system lenses. 2. Most programs limit eligibility based on justice criteria - namely, offense or criminal history - and many are limited to first-time offenses. 3. Jurisdictions take advantage of available statutory options, and collaborate across agencies to develop programs. 4. Jurisdictions explore diversion alternatives throughout the justice system continuum, and the prosecutorial stage offers many opportunities for intercept. 5. Most programs access clinical services, and many access other supportive services. However, many were not able to reportthe use of evidence-based practices. 6. Programs use a variety of funding mechanisms, and many rely on local budgets and participant fees. 7. While many programs report outcomes, in most cases those outcomes do not rise to a statistical measure that can be analyzed or compared on level footing with other programs. Eight recommendations emerged from this analysis that are intended to guide criminal justice system practitioners and other stakeholders in the development, implementation, expansion, replication, and improvement of diversion programs. The recommendations are also intended to inform and motivate policymaker discussions and decisions, as diversion programs continue to proliferate and drive the next wave of criminal justice reform. 1. Incorporate research findings and evidence-based practices into diversion programs. 2. Apply resources to individuals and programs with potential to achieve the greatest impact. 3. Incorporate community-based behavioral health and social services into diversion programs, as appropriate, especially substance use and mental health services. 4. Leverage all available resources for community-based behavioral health and social services, and strongly advocate to protect and expand them. 5. Adopt standardized program goals, outcome and performance measures, and terminology. 6. Adopt standardized data collection and analysis models and mechanisms. 7. Develop a web-based, searchable directory of diversion programs in Illinois. 8. Develop opportunities for cross-system education,training, and technical assistance available to jurisdictions for the purpose of establishing, expanding, and improving prosecutorial diversion programs. The amplification of diversion as a viable and useful justice practice suggests new promise to transform encumbered systems and bring a culture of restoration to lives, families, and communities that have been eroded by justice system involvement. As a growing field, there are many opportunities for improvement in diversion practices-in how programs are designed, implemented, and evaluated; in how data are collected and shared; and in ensuring that community services are available and accessible for those who need them, and as soon as they need them. These recommendations offer a pathway toward realizing that new promise. Details: Chicago: Author, 2017. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 25, 2019 at: http://www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/sites/www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/files/publications/IL-ProsecutorialDiversionSurvey-2017.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/sites/www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/files/publications/IL-ProsecutorialDiversionSurvey-2017.pdf Shelf Number: 155516 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity-Based CorrectionsCriminal Justice ReformDiversion ProgramsProsecutorial DiversionProsecutors |
Author: Davis, Robert C. Title: A synthesis of literature on the effectiveness of community orders Summary: This report presents the findings of a review of the literature on the effectiveness of community orders in reducing re-offending. The National Audit Office (NAO) has begun research on a range of measures used by the government to divert offenders from prison and into community-based treatment and interventions. The NAO commissioned RAND Europe to conduct this review to identify and synthesize international research about the effectiveness of community orders in reducing re-offending. In this report, we review research on ten of the common requirements contained in community orders. Through examining reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses we draw conclusions about the state of research in the areas of unpaid work, mental health treatment, education/skills training, drug treatment, anger management, alcohol treatment, programmes for perpetrators of domestic abuse, regular probation, intensive probation and cognitive/behavioural programming. We also assess the strength of the evidence on whether each of these requirements affects the likelihood of re-offending. We find that the quality of research on the effectiveness of community-based interventions for offenders is extremely variable. However, in two areas - cognitive/behavioural programming and drug treatment - rigorous research exists that points to a reduction in the odds of re-offending. In four other areas - programmes for domestic abuse perpetrators, unpaid work, education and basic skills training and intensive probation - existing studies have not suggested that the programmes have a positive effect on recidivism. Finally, in four areas - anger management, probation, and alcohol and mental health treatment - the question of impact on re-offending remains unsettled. This review highlights the need for more rigorous research - especially randomized trials - into the requirements that constitute community orders. This report will be of particular interest to the NAO and relevant government departments, such as the Ministry of Justice and National Probation Service. It is also relevant for policy makers as well as a wider audience concerned with the challenge of designing and implementing effective and efficient interventions to divert offenders from prison and into the community. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND Europe, 2008. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 14, 2019 at: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2008/RAND_TR518.pdf Year: 2008 Country: International URL: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2008/RAND_TR518.pdf Shelf Number: 113270 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity OrdersCommunity-Based CorrectionsCommunity-Based TreatmentDiversion Programs |