EVALUATION FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS Presentation to the Santa - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SANTA CLARA COUNTY INMATE RECIDIVISM & PROGRAM EVALUATION FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Presentation to the Santa Clara County Reentry Network March 14, 2012

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Project Goals

1. Document the recidivism rate of inmates participating in programs vs. not participating.

• 2. Evaluate programs so the Department of Correction

and the Board of Supervisors know which programs are effective in reducing recidivism and where to allocate resources.

• 3. Make recommendations on programs to a) continue

as is b) continue with program modifications c) discontinue.

(Funding provided by ARRA, Byrne, IWF and General Fund)

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Factors Leading to Recidivism in SCC DOC Inmates

Factors Variable Percent Recidivated Age at arrest 24 or younger 58% Gang involvement Reported being in a gang at arrest 75% Drug offense Charged with “any” drug offense 71% Prior arrests 1 or more 6 or more 57% 77% Prior probation violations 1-2 3 or more 71% 85% Not involved in treatment Re-arrests (6-24 mo.) Re-convictions (6-24 mo.) Re-incarcerations (6-24 mo.) 34%-64% 24%-42% 24%-59%

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

SCC DOC Re-arrest, Re-conviction and Re-incarceration Rates for Treatment vs. Matched Comparison Samples

Treatment Sample Matched-Comparison Sample Treatment Effect % % % Re-arrest 6 month* 19.2 34.0 14.8 12 month* 32.6 46.6 14.0 24 month* 58.2 63.7  5.5 Re-conviction 6 month* 9.7 24.1 14.4 12 month* 16.4 32.8 16.4 24 month* 25.9 41.6 15.7 Re-incarceration 6 month* 18.1 24.1  6.0 12 month* 32.1 38.8  6.7 24 month 60.8 58.9

• *p<.01;

Note: Column totals may differ across variables due to missing data and differences in time in the community after release.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Findings demonstrate that persons involved in treatment were “significantly” less likely to be re-arrested and re- convicted at 6, 12 and 24 months and less likely to be re-incarcerated at 6 and 12 months compared to similar individuals who were not involved in treatment.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Fewer SCC DOC inmates were re-arrested and re- convicted at 12 and 24 months compared to California inmates discharged from the CDCR.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

SCC DOC Re-arrest, Re-conviction and Re-incarceration Rates Compared to California Inmates

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Source: SCC DOC Recidivism Study, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. 2011 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report. Office of Research, November 23, 2011. ^ Rates for “Arrests” and “Convictions” only include those felons where an automated criminal history record was available from the Department of Justice. Re-incarceration data for CDCR is for FY08. Note: Column totals may differ across variables due to missing data and differences in time in the community after release.

CDCR Inmates SCC DOC Inmates % %

Re-arrests 12 month 57.0 32.6 24 month 70.1 58.2 Re-convictions 12 month 20.7 16.4 24 month 36.3 25.9 Re-incarcerations 24 month 59.2 60.8

*p<.01;

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Other SCC DOC Recidivism Findings Treatment had the greatest effect on reducing re-arrests and re-convictions with high risk SCC DOC inmates at 6, 12 and 24 months. In contrast, treatment had the least effect lowering the recidivism of low risk inmates. (consistent with national research on risk)

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Percent of SCC DOC Inmate Re-convictions by Risk Level and Time Interval

6 Month Re-conviction % 12 Month Re-conviction % 24 Month Re-conviction % Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk Treatment Sample (2.0)** (8.0)** (23.1)** (4.2)** (14.6)** (34.9)** (10.8) (24.1)** (49.6)** Matched- Comparison Sample (3.6)** (20.7)** (57.9)** (7.2)** (30.2)** (65.0)** (12.8) (41.7)** (72.3)** Percent Difference

• 1.6
• 12.7
• 34.8
• 3.0
• 15.6
• 30.1

NS

• 17.6
• 22.7

*p<.05; **p<.01; Note: Column totals may differ across variables due to missing data and differences in time in the community post release. Percent difference is the effect of treatment between the treatment and the comparison sample and was calculated by subtracting the treatment sample from the matched comparison sample.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Some Programs Produced Greater Reductions in Re-convictions than Others

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati Program Title 6-month 12-month 24-month Artemis    Breaking Barriers  Day Reporting   Get Right  HOPE    M8    MY STORI    PACE   RCP I Men    RCP I Women    WINGS   

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Summary Recidivism Study Conclusions

• Treatment led to reduced re-arrests and re-convictions at 6, 12 and 24

months and in re-incarcerations at 6 and 12 months. No programs significantly lowered re-incarcerations at 24 months

• Only a few programs produced no or little effect from treatment
• Greatest effect occurred with medium and high risk inmates
• Least effect occurred with low risk inmates
• Assess inmates’ risk to reoffend in addition to security level
• Match medium and high risk inmates with cognitive behavioral treatment:
• 200-300 hours for high risk inmates
• 100 hours for medium risk inmates
• Education and activities for low risk inmates

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

PART II Evidence-Based Program Evaluation

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

What Is Meant by Effective Programs?

Programs adhere to the Principles of Effective Intervention (PEI):

• Risk Principle: Target high risk offenders for intense

programming

• Need Principle: Target criminogenic risk/need factors

that increase risk to reoffend

• Responsivity Principle: Adapt treatment to individual

needs/sufficient duration and dosage

• Fidelity: Deliver programs consistently according to

prescribed manual/track person’s gains

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Scores of SCC DOC Programs

CPC Content Area Mean Median Minimum- Maximum Range Program Staff & Support 66.0 60.0 60 – 100 Offender Assessment 0.0 0.0 0.0 – 0.0* Treatment 34.2 31.4 25.7 – 66.7 Quality Assurance 14.0 0.0 0.0 – 60.0

Source: Correctional Programs Checklist. 65%-100%=Highly Effective; 55%-64%=Effective; 45%-54%=Needs Improvement; Less than 45%=Ineffective. SCCDOC has the CAIS, a validated

• ffender assessment instrument that scores inmates as low, medium and high risk to reoffend.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Summary Findings from EBP Evaluation

Santa Clara County DOC Programs:

• Are Delivered by Well-Qualified & Dedicated Staff
• Do Not Yet Use an Objective Assessment to Score Inmates According to

Risk to Reoffend (Low, Medium and High Risk)

• Are Not Yet Matched with Person’s Level of Risk to Reoffend – Some

Offenders Receiving Less or More Intervention Than They Require

• Low Scores in Treatment Effectiveness Due To:
• Curricula Does Not Target Criminogenic Needs)
• No Cognitive Behavioral Treatment
• 2 Programs Measure Program Gains
• All Programs Can Be Modified to Follow PEI

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Recommended Program Modifications

• Expand Core Programs:
• CBT Substance Abuse Treatment with Skills Rehearsals
• Cognitive Behavioral Skills Training
• Conflict Resolution/Anger Management
• Academic/Post-Graduate Education/Job Readiness Training
• Reentry Preparation
• Aftercare
• Adopt an Objective/Validated Risk and Needs Assessment: Scores Low,

Medium and High Risk to Reoffend (R.O. needed to assess inmates and manage their cases)

• Allocate Resources to Medium and High Risk Inmates/Assign Low Risk

Inmates to Work, Self-Guided Education (Roadmap to Recovery), Library, etc.)

• Work with Providers to Strengthen their Programs to Meet the Principles of

Effective Intervention

• Form Implementation Team and Workgroups

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Focus on 3 or more criminogenic needs in the Case Plan because these will produce the highest reduction in future recidivism.

Gendreau, P., French, S.A., and A. Taylor (2002). What Works (What Doesn’t Work) Revised 2002. Invited Submission to the International Community Corrections Association Monograph Series Project.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

• Examined 58 studies:

 CBT Resulted in Average 25%-52% Reduction in Recidivism

“Odds Ratio: Offenders involved in CBT had a one and one half greater likelihood of not recidivating after discharge from correctional supervision than those who were not involved in treatment”.

Source: Landenberger, Nana A., Lipsey, Mark W. The Positive Effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Programs for Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of Factors Associated with Effective Treatment. In press, Journal of Experimental Criminology,, 2005.

Effects of Cognitive Behavioral Treatment for Offenders

Landenberger & Lipsey (2005)*

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

When treated inmates are transitioned to aftercare support services following discharge, level of reoffending drops by more than one third.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

These reforms would not be possible without

the collaboration of system partners and treatment providers.

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

In-Custody

• Transition Planning Starts

at Intake

• Final Discharge Plan 2

Weeks Prior to Release

• Federal Benefit

Reinstatement Applications Elements of Transition Plan

• Corporation of Supportive

Housing San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, Contra Costa, Cook County, Ohio (Tenant Screening, Rental Subsidies, On-Site Services)

• Partnership for Prescription

Assistance: Reentry Illinois

• Case Management: Returning

Home Ohio to Access Local Services/Appointments

• Workforce Investment Act
• Huskey & Associates &

University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Essential Elements of Aftercare Programming

Community Phase of Reentry (Six Months)

• MOA with CBOs to Continue Programming After Discharge
• Every Person Released Assigned a Mentor (Faith-Based

Organizations, University Interns, Parent Advocates, Peer Mentors)

• Reentry Resource Tool Kit

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

6 Core Programs

1.

Substance Abuse Treatment with Cognitive Behavioral Elements

2.

Cognitive Behavioral Skills Training

3.

Conflict Resolution/Anger Management

4.

Academic and Post-Graduate Education/Job Readiness Training

5.

Re-Entry Preparation

6.

Aftercare

Key Recommendations

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Recommendation Timeline

Adopt a Risk and Needs Assessment Tool In process, implementation planned for Spring 2012 Expand number of Core Programs to six

• In process
• 5 of the 6 Core Programs will be offered each day of

the week

• Begin Core Programs at Elmwood, expand to Main

Jail

• Core classes will be taught in all in-custody programs
• 6th Core Program will be taught out-of-custody at new

Re-Entry Center Allocate resources to Medium and High Risk inmates

• Completed. Rehabilitation Officer has been assigned to

Main Jail for high risk population. DOC will continue to assess the need.

Recommendations, Steps Taken, and Timeline for Core Programs

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Recommendation Timeline

Work with providers to deliver Core Programs based on Principles of Effective Intervention

• 15 of the programs were recommended to “continue with

modifications”. Department will work with these programs to meet Principles of Effective Intervention (PEI).

• 5 of the programs were recommended to be discontinued.

DOC will continue to work with these programs to meet PEI, and report back to Public Safety and Justice Committee in 6 months on progress. Adherence to treatment and quality assurance for all programs

• DOC is developing Pre and Post tests, and statistical

tracking mechanisms. Planned implementation is April 2012.

• DOC is developing anonymous surveys for participants.

Under development, and planned implementation is July 2012. Form implementation teams and workgroups Completed and in use.

Recommendations, Steps Taken, and Timeline for Core Programs (cont.)

Santa Clara County Reentry Network Inmate Recidivism & Program Evaluation Findings & Recommendations March 14, 2012

Thank You! Contact: Bobbie Huskey, bhuskey@huskey-associates.com Martha Wapenski, martha.wapenski@sheriff.sccgov

Huskey & Associates & University of Cincinnati