What is Community Corrections? Probation: Pre-trial and Sentenced Offenders Parole and Reentry Programs Stand-Alone Intermediate Sanctions Programs: Day Reporting Centers, Electronic Monitoring Programs Residential Community Corrections
Why community corrections matters 1.Community corrections is a reflection of community values( legitimacy of the law, respect for others, belief in reformation/individual offender change) 2. Community corrections is the most commonly used and effective offender control strategy currently available (e.g. in terms of cost and recidivism reduction). 3. Community corrections helps attain critical correctional goals (e.g. punishment, community protection , rehabilitation, justice) 4. Community corrections is essential for the efficient operation of the criminal justice system at several key decision points: (1) pretrial release and supervision decisions, (2) sentencing/punishment decisions, (3)prison release and reentry decisions, and(4) revocation/return to prison decisions
Recent Changes in Community Corrections (1) New Programs —a whole variety of innovative intermediate sanctions has been developed, including reentry partnership initiatives, day reporting centers, day fines, drug courts (2) New Technologies---There has been an explosion in the use of information technology to monitor offenders in the community, including, new forms of electronic monitoring, new methods of drug testing, new methods of reporting via kiosks, etc) (3) New Personnel from both the public and private sector, many of whom have backgrounds and qualifications more in line with policing than traditional community corrections.
Correctional Control : The Numbers – Incarceration: As our prison system has grown, we have incarcerated individuals at a higher rate across all major offense categories. – State Offender Profile: However, we do in fact have a greater proportion of violent offenders in our state prison system today (52%) than a decade ago (47%). – Federal Offender Profile: By comparison, the majority of offenders in federal prison (6 out of 10) are serving time for drug related offenses. – Time Served: On average, offenders sent to prison in the United States received sentences of approximately 4.5 years; they will typically be released in 2.5 years. Offenders receive jail sentences of about 6 months in duration, but jail systems vary in the actual time served.
Effectiveness: Can We Control Offenders in the Community? Probation’s effectiveness has decreased over the past several decades( 80% success rate in the 70’s vs. 60% today) Parole’s effectiveness is lower(50%); and has also decreased, but not as dramatically. Churning: Two- thirds of all offenders released from prison this year are predicted to be rearrested at least once within 3 years; 40% will return to prison during this period( new criminal conviction or technical revocation)
Surveillance and Control Technical Violations : In 2005, almost half of all new prison admissions (300,000 of 600,000) were technical violators; they were returned to prison for periods ranging from a few months to several years (in California, technical violators served an additional 9 months in prison. How should we respond ? : One of the ongoing dilemmas for community corrections is how to enforce multiple, control-based supervision conditions without relying on prison as the primary sanction for noncompliance.
Changes in Prison Release Policies The major shift in parole release mechanisms over the past 25 years has been away from discretionary release and toward supervised mandatory release . Discretionary Release: In 1980, about 55% of all offenders were released from prison based on a discretionary decision by a state parole board. By 2005, only slightly more than 20 % were released from prison in this manner . Mandatory Release: During this same period, many state legislatures rewrote their parole release guidelines to create a new release mechanism, supervised mandatory release, which essentially eliminated the need for a discretionary parole board review. Once offenders completed their mandatory minimum period of incarceration, they were released from prison and placed under mandatory community supervision for a specified follow-up period. In 1980, approximately 18% of all prisoners were released in this manner, but by 2005, almost 40% of all inmates re-entered the community on supervised mandatory release.
Examples of Hard Technology Innovations New Electronic Monitoring Systems( GPS) New Drug Testing technology New Technologies for managing alcoholinvolved offenders: ignition interlock devices and remote alcohol monitoring New Technologies for managing sex offenders: polygraphs,penile plethsysmographs, and computer use monitoring ( Field Search). Automated Reporting Systems( Kiosks) Language Translation Devices
Examples of Soft Technology Innovations In Community Corrections New Risk Assessment Instruments New Case Management Systems New Supervision Strategies( Proactive Community Supervision, utilizing motivational interviewing and positive reenforcers in conjunction with sanctions. COMSTAT for Community Corrections: Timing, Location, and Risk
New Technologies for managing sex offenders: Polygraph Testing: reliability issues Penile Plethysmograph: controversial Field Search and other computer monitoring strategies http://www.justnet.org/Pages/fieldsearch.a spx http://www.forensic-centre.com/assessmen ts/penile_plethysmographyenile
Automated Reporting Systems What is a Kiosk? The KIOSK is utilized when accountability and monitoring can be enhanced or accomplished when a personal interaction between the probationer and probation officer are not required. An example would be administrative probation, i.e. monitoring the timely payment of court costs, fines, restitution and compliance with random drug testing. The KIOSK is a fully automated reporting system where a person on pretrial release or probation can complete a routine interview. The person’s identity is verified by a biometric fingerprint scan. New York City uses Kiosks to supervise about 50,000 probationers each year.
The Effectiveness of Hard Technology: A Summary 1. Control vs. Change 2. Targeted Supervision and Surveillance 3. Cost considerations: A Look at Massachusetts( Probation Budget has increased by 123% in past 10 years, even though probation caseloads have not increased).
Introduction Crime concentrated by: 1) Person, 2) Place, 3) Time Small percent of offender account for majority of serious offenses Small % of neighborhoods Offender crime most likely in few months following release http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/upl oadedFiles/PSPP_1in31_report_FINAL_WEB_ 3-26-09.pdf
Community correction systems spread to thin. Probation rates have dropped from 80% to 60% success in completing supervision terms Need to be reconstructed to incorporate new strategies Develop programs that focus on both offender accountability and change
Informal Social Controls Relationship between offender and corrections officer (I.e. Supervision and treatment) Technique changes to assess offenders -New risk classifications -Training line staff -Developing case management plans
New Generation of proactive concentrated supervision Time, Offender, Location 1) Move parole (and probation) resources up front 2) Use risk instruments to determine initial and ongoing level of supervision 3) After an initial period, resources to supervise should decrease
Dimension 1: Timing is everything (front-load resources What can be done differently to reduce risk at the start of supervision periods? Continuity of treatment as offenders transition Proactive, structured reentry plan that includes accountability & treatment/resource dimensions
Concentration by time: Offenders pose greatest risk to community at start of probation or parole periods Concentration by time: focuses limited community corrections resources at start of term Time-focused supervision strategies, first step toward shorter supervision terms Texas and California account for quarter of all U.S. Offenders.
What does the research on the changing risk of re-offending over time reveal? Re-arrest during the first month after release from prison Re-offending (drug, property, and violent offenses) NRC: risk rates drop 50% between first and 15th month after release (dug and property offenders) Only 20% for violent offenders Crime-specific probabilities influenced by variables including: offender risk level, conviction offense type, location, and supervision
Figure 2. Pr obabi lity of Arrest for a V iolent , Prope rty, or Drug Crime 36 Month s A fter Re lease Fr om Pr ison Note: Pr obabili ties adjusted for time off the street. Ta ble Adapted From Par ole, Desistance from Crime, and Comm unity Integra tion (http://www. nap.edu/ca talog/1198 8.html) Source: Richard Rosenfeld, Robert Fornango, and Joel Wallm an.
Risked based concentration supervision strategies based on 2 assumptions: 1) All offenders placed on community supervisions are at greatest risk to re-offend during first few months 2) There are subgroup of “high risk” offenders that are more likely to fail while on community supervision
Concentration by Offender Attempts to target limited community corrections resources on the offenders who either pose the greatest risk to the community or who are most likely to benefit from the provision of treatment. Jurisdictions must consider cost containment strategies Need to assess offenders risk level and than design evidence-based risk reduction strategies
Table1: The NewTechnology of Community orr C ections. Community Corrections HARD Technology GPS/RF electroni c monitoring technology for offenderlocation, monitoringof zone restrictions, etc. language translators Breathalyzers, instan t drug tests Polygraph tests Laptopsorflinestaff GPS forstafflocation Reporting kiosks Remote alcoho l monitoring devices plethysmographs Source: B yrne and Rebovich(2007) SOFT Technology Newclassification devices rfothe assessmentf se ox, drug, an d mentallyill offenders Newworkloa d softwa re Mapping twa sofre applications(offender location, resour ce location) Infor mationsharing with ommunity c , police,eatment tr providers Compute r software to monitor sex ffende o r internet activities
Why Location Matter (Concentration by Location) High Risk “Poverty Pocket Neighborhoods” Crime mapping and crime analysis techniques to identify geographic concentration Strategies to workload reallocation, identify treatment resources or highlight shortfalls in networks available
Conclusion Past three decades, total pop. of U.S. community corrections system has grown from 4 to 7 million offenders Proactive, concentrated community supervision strategies offer an alternative A need for change