Bureau of Community Sanctions Audit Standards

Similar documents
DOC & PRISONER REENTRY

Hamilton County Municipal and Common Pleas Court Guide

CSG JUSTICE CENTER MASSACHUSETTS CRIMINAL JUSTICE REVIEW

The Primacy of Drug Intervention in Public Safety Realignment Success. CSAC Healthcare Conference June 12, 2013

Oriana House, Inc. Programming & Criteria Guide

Factors Impacting Recidivism in Vermont. Report to House and Senate Committees April 21, 2011

Second Chance Act Grants: State, Local, and Tribal Reentry Courts

2016 Bidders Conference for Requests for Proposals (RFPs)

Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) Fresno County Sheriff s Department Fresno County Probation Department

WRITTEN TESTIMONY SUBMITTED BY DOUGLAS SMITH, MSSW TEXAS CRIMINAL JUSTICE COALITION

Introduction. Jail Transition: Challenges and Opportunities. National Institute

Overview of Recommendations to Champaign County Regarding the Criminal Justice System

WINDSOR COUNTY, VERMONT DUI TREATMENT DOCKET (WCDTD) FOR REPEAT OFFENSE IMPAIRED DRIVING CASES

Brief History of Community Corrections in Indiana. October 17, 2013

ASHTABULA COUNTY COMMON PLEAS MENTAL HEALTH COURT. JUDGE MARIANNE SEZON, 25 West Jefferson Street, Jefferson, Ohio PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK

Outcomes Analyses: Prepared 2/04/04 by Lois A. Ventura, Ph.D. Department of Criminal Justice College of Health and Human Services University of Toledo

Annual Report

STATEWIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RECIDIVISM AND REVOCATION RATES

Sacramento County Community Corrections Partnership

Interagency Council on Intermediate Sanctions

Office of Criminal Justice System Improvements Pretrial Drug and Alcohol Initiative. Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Solicitation

Sacramento County Community Corrections Partnership. Public Safety Realignment Plan. Assembly Bill 109 and 117. FY Realignment Implementation

Circuit Court of Cook County Performance Metrics Department Adult Probation

Nebraska Department of Correctional Services. Reentry Services VOCATIONAL & LIFE SKILLS PROGRAM

Sheriff Koutoujian, Middlesex County

AGENDA ITEM FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MEETING ( ) Discussion only ( X ) Action FROM (DEPT/ DIVISION): County Counsel

INMATE PROGRAMS. Partially-Sentenced Inmate: An inmate serving one or more sentences with adjudicated charges or holds.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Court-Involved Mental Health Clients - an Overview of Services

TJJD the Big Picture OBJECTIVES

COMMUNITY CORRECTION FACILITY. Lucas Count Youth Treatment Center

2016 Council of State Governments Justice Center

Example of how a Letter of Guidance and Letter of Concern is used by the Board of Medicine in the disciplinary process

Merced County. Public Safety Realignment & Post Release Community Supervision

JAG EBDM Jail Reentry Pilot Sites Project (2016)

S. ll. To reauthorize the Second Chance Act of IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

PAROLE DIVISION TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE NUMBER: PD/POP DATE: 12/04/17. PAGE: 1 of 10 POLICY AND OPERATING PROCEDURE

1 P a g e E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f D V R e s p i t e P l a c e m e n t s

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

Statewide Criminal Justice Recidivism and Revocation Rates

CCP Executive Retreat May 29, 2014

Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 (AB109)

AGENDA. Requested Action

[CCP STRATEGIC PLANNING MATRIX]

Prisoner Reentry and Adult Education. With our time together, we propose

Assessment of Disciplinary and Administrative Segregation Proposal

Speaker: Ruby Qazilbash. Ruby Qazilbash Associate Deputy Director Bureau of Justice Assistance Office of Justice Programs U.S. Department of Justice

Police may conduct these checks. The following is a summary of various methods used for background checks and the requirements for each.

Houston/Harris County County Continuum of Care: Priorities and Program Standards for Emergency Solutions Grant

SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA VETERANS COURT PROGRAM MENTOR GUIDE INTRODUCTION

Testimony of Michael C. Potteiger, Chairman Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole House Appropriations Committee February 12, 2014

Defining the Nathaniel ACT ATI Program

County Associations and State Governments: Working Together Toward Smart Justice

*Chapter 3 - Community Corrections

Justice Reinvestment in Indiana Analyses & Policy Framework

Yukon Corrections: Adult Custody Policy Manual

Biennial Report of the Texas Correctional Office on Offenders with Medical or Mental Impairments Fiscal Year

Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report

Report from an Evaluation of the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University Loss Prevention Program REPORT NUMBER SFLPP-33-15/16-FAMU

Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons Release Preparation Program

OFFENDER REENTRY PROGRAM

OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER Matthew Foley

IC Chapter 2. State Grants to Counties for Community Corrections and Charges to Participating Counties for Confined Offenders

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Tarrant County, Texas Adult Criminal Justice Data Sheet

The Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) Initiative

Program Guidelines and Procedures Supersedes: January 6, for Adult Transitional Case Management

Justice Reinvestment in West Virginia

Ohio Department of Youth Services Competitive RECLAIM Request for Proposals

Criminal Justice Division

Agenda: Community Supervision Subgroup

Community Public Safety Repair Plan

Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction (MIOCR) Program. Michael S. Carona, Sheriff~Coroner Orange County Sheriff s s Department

San Francisco Adult Probation Department. Fiscal Year Annual Report

PROGRESSIVE INTERVENTIVE SANCTIONS AND INCENTIVES MODEL IN EL PASO, HUDSPETH AND CULBERSON COUNTIES

Harris County Mental Health Jail Diversion Program Harris County Sequential Intercept Model

Biennial Report of the Texas Correctional Office on Offenders with Medical or Mental Impairments Fiscal Year

A Strategic Planning Framework for Prisoner Reentry TARGETS FOR POLICY CHANGE THAT GUIDE IMPLEMENTATION

Community Transition Center: A Collaborative Approach to Offender Reentry

SENATE, No STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 217th LEGISLATURE INTRODUCED DECEMBER 12, 2016

Biennial State Plan July 1, 2017 June 30, 2019

Closing the Revolving Door: Community. National Association of Sentencing Commissions August 2, 2011

2/18/2014. Trudy Raymundo, Director, San Bernardino County Department of Public Health

Diagnosing Gang Problems in the Caribbean

Justice-Involved Veterans

HIV SERVICES ACUITY TOOL PILOT IMPLEMENTATION MEETING. October 16, 2014

Mental. Health. Court. Handbook

Adult DUI/Drug Court Certification Application

COMMUNITY SUPERVISION & CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT OF TAYLOR, CALLAHAN & COLEMAN COUNTIES

Steven K. Bordin, Chief Probation Officer

SUNSET ADVISORY COMMISSION. Texas Department of Criminal Justice Board of Pardons and Paroles Correctional Managed Health Care Committee

Title 10: COMMERCE AND TRADE

COORDINATOR OF SPECIALTY DOCKETS AND GRANTS

CALL FOR PRESENTERS TRAINING INSTITUTE THEME

Justice & Mental Health Collaboration Program Category 2 Law Enforcement Planning Grantees FY2017 Orientation Webinar

Adult Felony Drug Court Certification Application

Definitions. The following words and phrases shall have the following

COMMUNITY PARTNERS BREAKFAST. Overview of CRJ

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE THINKING FOR A CHANGE

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Transcription:

6/25/213 Bureau of Community Sanctions Audit Kara Peterson, Assistant Chief Bureau of Community Sanctions kara.peterson@odrc.state.oh.us 614-752-1192 How did we get here? What was wrong with the old audit standards? Timeline Initial CBCF/HWH research study commissioned by DRC to evaluate program effectiveness published by University of Cincinnati in 9/2. Research Steering Committee developed in 12/2. Committee recommendation to develop standardized risk assessment instrument. General minimum performance-based standards developed in 25. CCA research study published in 4/5. Minimum performance-based audits began FY 26. Average Audit Scores Fiscal Year 26 Fiscal Year 21 CBCF 97% CCA 47 95% CCA 48 93% HWH 87% CBCF 98.5% CCA 47 97% CCA 48 96% HWH 95% Follow-up Research and Next Steps CBCF/HWH follow-up study published by UC in 3/1. February 211 Audit Standard Workgroup convened to revise existing minimum performance-based standards based on follow-up research. Workgroup comprised of Program Directors from CCA, CBCF and halfway house programs. Follow-up Research and Next Steps Draft standard revisions distributed to all community programs for feedback and comment. June 211 Audit Workgroup considered program feedback and completed further standard revisions. October 211 audit standards piloted at 4 community programs (Common Pleas, Municipal, CBCF, HWH). 1

6/25/213 Follow-up Research and Next Steps Audit standards further revised based on pilot audits. FY212 audits did not score programs based on audit outcomes. Provided time to understand audit measures and establish a baseline for compliance. FY213 programs not audited. Receiving coaching and technical assistance site visits to assist with implementation of program improvements. Sites with larger numbers of non-compliance receive higher numbers of site visits to allow for more extensive technical assistance. What are they based on? Why do we have them? Incarceration Reduction Recidivism Reduction Designed to reduce the number of days in jail. Examples include Electronic Monitoring, Community Work Service, Pretrial Designed to be more cost effective than jail. Operate at a lower cost per offender than recidivism reduction programs. Designed to serve lower risk offenders. 8 BCS audit standards are applied to these programs. Designed to reduce the likelihood of future crime. Examples include CBCF, HWH, ISP Designed to follow evidence-based principles. Risk, Need, Treatment, and Program Integrity Operate at a higher cost per offender. Designed to serve higher risk offenders. 39 BCS audit standards are applied to these programs. Risk Principle Target those offenders with a higher probability of recidivism. Provide the most intensive treatment and interventions to higher risk offenders. Intensive treatment for lower risk offenders can increase recidivism. Probability of Reincarceration 1-1 -2-3 -4 Treatment Effects for Low Risk Offenders Program AA Program EE Program Y Program HH Program LL Program L Program Q Program BB Program K Program GG Program Z Program N Program V Program DD Program II Program S Program O Program All Program M Program P Program FF Program I Program MM Program R Program JJ Program X Program E Program U Program G Program W Program J Program D Program A Program KK Program F Program CC Program B -36-32 -29-29 -21-21 -21-21 -16-15 -11-11 -11-7 -7-6 -5-4 -4-4 -2-2 -2-1 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 8 9 2

r-value r-value 6/25/213 Probability of Reincarceration Treatment Effects for High Risk Offenders 4 3 2 1-1 -2-3 -4-34 -15-14 -18-17 -1-8 -6-5 Program M Program O Program L Program K Program J Program I Program H Program G Program F Program E Program D Program C Program B Program A -2-2 2 3 3 3 5 7 8 8 8 1 1 12 12 12 13 13 15 19 21 22 Program MM Program LL Program KK Program JJ Program II Program HH Program GG Program FF Program EE Program DD Program CC Program BB Program AA Program Z Program Y Program X Program W Program V Program U Program S Program All Program R Program Q Program P Program N 24 25 25 27 3 32 33 34 Changes in Recidivism by Program Factors for Probation Programs.12.1.8.6.4.2 -.2 -.4.5 -.2.4 High Risk Sample High Risk Longer Supervision.7.1 High Risk More Txt.11 -.3 High Risk More Referrals Change in Recidivism by 4 Point Factor Score for Probation Programs.15.1.5 -.5 -.1 -.15 -.13.3.15 Factors 1 or 2 Factors 3 Factors Risk Related Audit BCS #11: Programs shall target appropriate participants for the program and develop and adhere to written criteria that exclude inappropriate participants. BCS #12: Programs shall administer internally, or refer to a community agency for completion, the following assessments as indicated: The appropriate Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) tool at designated interval; Need assessments, such as, alcohol and other drug, sex offender, domestic violence; Responsivity factors, such as, mental health, personality,motivation or readiness to change, intelligence, learning style, reading level and literacy. Risk Related Audit BCS #17: Treatment groups shall separate offenders by risk and need level. BCS #18: The duration and intensity of services (internal/external referrals, programming) provided to offenders shall be based on risk. High risk offenders shall receive more services and referrals, at a higher intensity than moderate risk offenders. The Need Principle Assess and identify criminogenic needs those conditions and social structures that make it more likely for crime to occur. Supervision and treatment should focus on and target criminogenic needs. Needs to be targeted should be identified by risk/need assessment not a one size fits all approach. If this approach is followed recidivism rates can be lowered. 3

6/25/213 Targeting Criminogenic Need: Results from Meta-Analyses Reduction in Recidivism.35.3.25.2.15.1.5 Increase in Recidivism -.5 Target 1-3 more non-criminogenic needs Target at least 4-6 more criminogenic needs What to Target Criminal Attitudes, Values and Beliefs Criminal Associates Antisocial Behavior Personality Employment Family Substance Abuse Source: Gendreau, P., French, S.A., and A.Taylor (22). What Works (What Doesn t Work) Revised 22. Invited Submission to the International Community Corrections Association Monograph Series Project Need Related Audit BCS #12: Programs shall administer internally, or refer to a community agency for completion, the following assessments as indicated: The appropriate Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) tool at designated interval; Need assessments, such as, alcohol and other drug, sex offender, domestic violence; Responsivity factors, such as, mental health, personality,motivation or readiness to change, intelligence, learning style, reading level and literacy. Need Related Audit BCS #13: At minimum, 7% of services offered, programming and referrals provided by the program shall target criminogenic needs. BCS #16: Treatment groups shall be separated by gender. BCS #17: Treatment groups shall separate offenders by risk and need level. Need Related Audit BCS #19: All programs designed to reduce offender risk and needs shall ensure services are individualized and address criminogenic targets, based on the results of the offender s current Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) assessment and other results obtained from additional assessments administered or received by the program. Offenders shall actively participate in the development of their individual case plan. Treatment Principle The most effective interventions are behavioral. Treatment needs to focus on current factors that influence behavior. Treatment needs to be action-oriented. Offender behaviors need to be appropriately reinforced positive, pro-social behaviors rewarded and anti-social, violation behavior sanctioned. 4

% Change in Recidivism Percent Change in Recidivism 6/25/213 Relationship between Treatment Model and Treatment Effect for Residential Programs 1 8 6 4 2-2 -4-6 -8-1 9 Cognitive Behavioral Other Source: Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D., 22 Ohio CBCF/HWH Study -9 Treatment Related Audit BCS #2: The program shall implement a behavior management system that includes both rewards and punishers designed to encourage new skills and prosocial behavior, while suppressing anti-social behavior. BCS #21: Program/supervision completion shall be determined by established, defined criteria based on the offender s progress in acquiring pro-social behaviors, attitudes and beliefs and not engaging in illegal activity. Programs shall incorporate a standardized process to periodically and objectively reassess offender progress in meeting case plan goals. Treatment Related Audit BCS #22: Treatment groups that include skill modeling and skill training shall not exceed a ratio of 12 offenders per actively involved facilitator, unless specifically noted in the curriculum utilized by the program. Program Integrity Need to ensure treatment is delivered with integrity delivered as designed. Remove barriers to treatment for the offender. Programs based on cognitive-behavioral principles can substantially reduce recidivism; however, the same program poorly implemented can actually increase recidivism. Effect of Program Integrity on Recidivism: Results from Meta Analysis Andrews and Dowden 1999 5 45 4 3 2 1 33 22 23 7 7 5 Trained Workers Specific Model 28 22 2 12 1 9 8 Monitor Change Printed Manuals Supervised Workers Involved Researcher Adequate Dosage BCS #8: Job performance for staff shall be reviewed annually. Evaluations for staff in direct contact with offenders as part of their job duties should include rating on areas such as, communication skills, modeling pro-social behaviors, use of redirection techniques and behavioral reinforcements, knowledge of program s treatment model and effective interventions. In addition to formal, written annual evaluation(s), supervisors shall train, monitor, guide and assist staff to ensure effective delivery of services. 5

6/25/213 BCS #9: All full-time staff, with a primary function of working with offenders, shall annually complete a minimum of 24 hours of training, relevant to evidence-based practices and service delivery. All other staff, having minimal contact with offenders, shall annually complete a minimum of 8 hours of training related to evidence-based practices. Training hours for part-time staff shall be on a prorated basis. The Program Director or Training Administrator shall approve relevant staff training and ensure training hours are completed. BCS #14: The program shall maintain treatment manuals which are used by facilitators, containing goals and content of the group, teaching methods, lesson plans, exercises, activities and assignments. BCS #24: The program shall implement a quality assurance process ensuring the accuracy of completed Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) assessment tools and all staff completing ORAS assessments is currently certified by the authorized entity. BCS #25: Programs shall conduct case record audits to ensure offender records are current, complete and accurate. The file reviews should include, but not be limited to: accuracy of assessment results, case plan based on assessment results, treatment progress is being monitored and documented. BCS #26: The Program Director or designee(s) shall conduct regular monitoring and observation of staff in group facilitation and service delivery. A process shall be implemented to provide feedback to staff. BCS #27: The Program Director or designee shall monitor programmatic services targeting a criminogenic need provided on-site by external entities under (sub)contract or memorandum of understanding. All (sub)contracts for programmatic services targeting a criminogenic need are to be evidence-based. A quality assurance process shall be in place to ensure contractual services meet the program and offender needs. BCS #28: The Program Director or designee shall monitor the utilization of external referrals for treatment services targeting a criminogenic need provided in the community. A quality assurance process shall be in place to ensure outside treatment services targeting a criminogenic need meet the program and offender needs. Audit standards are based on research. 6

6/25/213 The bar has been raised. Funding is now dependent on incorporating characteristics of effective programs. You will not achieve 1% audit compliance and that s OK. You will receive technical assistance to guide and assist in implementing changes. Audits will help identify service gaps and assist in guiding future funding needs. 7