Prisoner Reentry in Michigan

Theory and PracticeTheory and PracticeJanuary 14, 2013January 14, 2013

Promoting public safety through effective policies and systems

MCCD is a statewide organization that partners with Michigan’s citizens and leaders to develop a comprehensive solution to crime and delinquency.

Our work includes:

From 2003 – 2011, partnered with the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) and Public Policy Associates, Inc. (PPA) to design and implement the Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Initiative (MPRI).

Continue to partner with local stakeholders in Michigan and other states to improve community safety by increasing success rates among returning prisoners.

AdvocacyTechnical Assistance

Education and Training

ConveningEvidence-informed PolicyResearch and Evaluation

3

National Overview of Reentry

The United States leads the world in incarceration rates.• European countries (1:1,000)• United States (1:100)

Over 7 million adults are under some form of correctional supervision in the United States today.• Up from 1.8 million in 1980.

More than 97% of individuals incarcerated in state prisons will be released at some point.

Over 600,000 individuals are released from prison each year.• It is estimated that roughly 1/3 of released

offenders are younger than 24 years of age.

4

National Overview of ReEntry

The incidence of serious mental illnesses is two to four times higher among prisoners than it is in the general population.

Three quarters of those returning from prison have a history of substance use disorders. Over 70 percent of prisoners with serious mental illnesses also have a substance use disorder.

Only 7 percent to 17 percent of prisoners who meet DSM criteria for alcohol/drug dependence or abuse receive treatment in jail or prison.

5

National Overview of ReEntry

Over the 20-year period of 1988 – 2008, spending on corrections has been among the fastest growing items in state budgets.

American taxpayers spent $12 billion for corrections in 1988; by 2008, this figure rose to $52 billion

Between 1977 and 2001, total state and local expenditures for corrections increased 1,001%, compared to:• 448% for education• 482% for hospitals and healthcare• 617% for public welfare

6

National Overview of ReEntry

Bureau of Justice Statistics study estimated that approximately half of the more than 683,000 people released from state prisons in 2008 would be reincarcerated within 3 years.

Revocations are the fastest growing category of prison admissions—parole violators account for 34% of new prison admissions today (as compared to 18% in 1980)

7

High Costs, Unacceptable Outcomes in Michigan

Prior to launching the Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Initiative: More than 13,000 inmates released each year

• Approximately 85% were paroled, 15%discharged on maximum sentence

Of the 11,000 inmates paroled: • Expectation that over 5,000 (45%) will return to

prison sometime during their parole sentence

Returning offenders cost the state $112 Million

8

National Initiatives

National Governor’s Association’s Prisoner Reentry Policy Academy (NGA)

National Institute of Corrections’ Transition from Prison to Community Initiative (TPCI)

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs’ Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI)

U.S. Department of Labor, Prisoner ReEntry Initiative (PRI)

9

Statewide Collaboration

• Launched in 2003 as partnership between:• State government

• Corrections• Education• Community

Health• Human Services

• Energy, Labor & Economic Growth

• MSHDA• Office of Faith and

Community Based Initiatives• Private partners

• Michigan Council on Crime and Delinquency

• Public Policy Associates, Inc.• Local communities

10

Statewide Structure

State Policy Team Executive Management Team Advisory Council Resource Teams Workgroups & Committees Pilot Sites• Local ReEntry Advisory Councils• Steering Teams• Transition Teams

11

MPRI Vision & Mission

The VISION: Every prisoner released from prison will have the tools needed to succeed in the community.

The MISSION: Reduce crime by implementing a seamless plan of services and supervision developed with each offender—delivered through state and local collaboration—from the time of their entry to prison through their transition, reintegration, and aftercare in the community.

12

MPRI Goals

Promote public safety by reducing the threat of harm to persons and their property by released offenders in the communities to which those offenders return.

Increase success rates of offenders who transition from prison by fostering effective risk management and treatment programming, offender accountability, and community and victim participation.

13

The Reentry Model

Sentencing

Transitional Accountability Plan

SentencingAssessment

&Classificatio

nBehavior

&Programm

ing

ReleasePreparation Revocati

on Decision Making

Supervision &

Services

Parole Dischar

ge & Aftercar

e

LawAbidingCitizen

Human Services AgenciesPrison

Release AuthorityCommunity Supervision

InstitutionalPhase

Re-EntryPhase

CommunityPhase

ReleaseDecisio

n Making

Admission to

Prison

Source: National Institute of Corrections’ Transition from Prison to Community Initiative (TPCI)

Transition from Prison to Community (TPC) Goals:- Public Safety by Reducing the Threat of Harm by

Released Offenders -- Increasing Offender Success by Fostering Effective Risk

Management - - Accountability for both Offender and System Officials -

- Community and Victim Participation –

14

Assessment and Classification

Implement “Systematic” risk assessment• Empirically-based risk instruments

Validated Normed for the population

• Use both “static” and “dynamic” risk predictors Assess and classify early in inmates’ terms of

imprisonment Periodically re-assess and re-classify inmates

during their terms of imprisonment Partnering agencies should share information

about inmates that could enable corrections agencies to better respond to those inmates’ needs.

15

Inmate Behavior and Programming

Develop a Transition Accountability Plan (TAP) for each inmate that:• Includes programs to modify inmates’ specific “dynamic”

risk factors Those that can be changed

– Substance abuse– Anti-social attitudes, beliefs, behaviors– Lack of pro-social leisure activities– Lack of Employment Skills– Lack of Education

Reduce risk of future recidivism• Specifies behavioral expectations and consequences,

including: Rewards Sanctions

• Covers each inmate’s time in prison, on supervision, and aftercare

16

Inmate Release Preparation

Focus on critical reentry issues• Housing• Employment• Conditions and restrictions• Continuity of treatment• Access to programs, services, support

17

Release Decision Making

Releasing Authority• Assigns each offender a tentative

release date • Describes expectations of behavior

and achievements• Defines general requirements of

supervision for each offender

18

Parole Supervision & Services

Supervision agency uses risk assessment tools to assign• supervision levels and strategies• conditions of supervision

Parole Agent and Transition Teams coordinate delivery of needed programs and support

19

Revocation Decision Making

Releasing authority establishes policy governing revocations• based on risk• based on nature of violation

Incorporates graduated responses to violations• as risk increases responses become harsher• as severity of violation increases responses become

harsher

Focus is on supporting behavior change

20

Parole Discharge and Aftercare

Establish policy governing discharge from supervision• Offenders should be moved off supervision and into

aftercare after a reasonable period of successful adjustment

Transition Team responsible for ensuring ex-offenders are able to identify needed services and access them.

Community networks and natural supports play key role in sustained success.

21

Implementation Timeline

2005: • Intensive Reentry Units (Phase II) • First 8 community pilot sites (Phase III)• Planning underway for Phase I implementation

2006: • Second wave of community sites

2007:• Statewide expansion

2008 – Present:• Phase I implementation and expansion to full-

scale

22

MPRI Regional Map

23

MPRI Local Structure

MPRI Advisory Council

MPRI FOACoordination

Team

Manager,FOA Co-Chair

Steering Team

Community Co-Chair, Chair of the MPRI Advisory

Council

Warden, CFA Co-

Chair

Community Coordinator Staffs the Steering Team and the MPRI process

Administrative Agency

MPRI Facility Coordination

Team

Admin. Agency

Co-Chair

24

Shifting Focus to Phase I

Assess all prisoners at intake using an actuarial risk assessment (COMPAS, VASOR, Static 99-R, SASSI)• 99% of current prisoners have been assessed

Risk-based programming menu and risk-based referral criteria established

Piloting a process for Parole Board to engage in case planning at time of intake

New policies and procedures drafted and under internal review re: individualized case planning, program delivery, program completion tracking, and case management

25

Reentry Budget

FY 2010 – 2011 Expenditures $45,995,260• Community Sites: $29,030,944• MDOC Projects: $16,964,266

FY 2011 – 2012 Budget $53,909,700• Community Sites: $26,474,434• MDOC Projects: $26,835,266

FY 2012 – 2013 Budget $51,587,700• Community Sites: $22,711,500• MDOC Projects: $24,126,200• Public Safety Initiative: $4,750,000

26

Data & Outcomes

Available data indicate improvements since the launch of reentry• Rate of parolees returning to prison for new

crimes or technical violations is at lowest level in 25 years

• Since 2003, the rate of parolees returning to prison within three years has decreased from nearly 1/2 of the individuals paroled to 1/3.

• Prison population decreased for 5 consecutive years following peak in 2007

27

Data & Outcomes

February 2012 Report on Performance Audit of the MPRI:• Recidivism rates improved following

implementation of MPRI• Parolees who utilized MPRI services had a lower

rate of recidivism than those who did not utilize services - recidivism rates were lowest for parolees who utilized all of the recommended services

• However, MDOC had not established a comprehensive process to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of MPRI services

28

Looking Forward

Improve data collection and analyses in order to demonstrate outcomes of reentry investment• In response to audit, MDOC working to improve data

collection and performance monitoring

Keep focus on success in the community by maintaining the vital role of community partners

Continue to build collaboration beyond corrections to engage other state departments and service systems in improving reentry outcomes