Community Reinvestment- Re-Entry - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 27
About This Presentation
Title:

Community Reinvestment- Re-Entry

Description:

Community Reinvestment- Re-Entry Maureen Price-Boreland, Esq. Executive Director Community Partners in Action, established 1875 Member Agency Of Connecticut ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:23
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 28
Provided by: mpr391
Learn more at: http://www.cpa-ct.org
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Community Reinvestment- Re-Entry


1
Community Reinvestment- Re-Entry
  • Maureen Price-Boreland, Esq.
  • Executive Director
  • Community Partners in Action, established 1875
  • Member Agency Of
  • Connecticut Association of Non-Profits

2
Goals of Effective Prison Re-entry
  • Safer Communities
  • Community Investment
  • Social reintegration
  • Stabilize the offender in the community
  • Continued intervention/supervision post
    incarceration
  • Reduce Recidivism
  • Reduce incarceration cost to the state

3
The state of the State of Connecticut re-entry
services
  • Connecticut is viewed nationally as progressive
    in its re-entry efforts
  • CTs DOC is committed to re-entry services
  • DOC and CSSD have a proven track record of
    funding a myriad of services for re-entry
    services
  • CT has a long and established good working
    relationship between the DOC, Board of Parole,
    CSSD and Community Providers

4
The state of the State of Connecticut re-entry
services.
  • CT through the legislative leadership of Bill
    Dyson and Mike Lawlor conducted a review and
    implementation of reinvestment strategies
    (Building Bridges 2003 2004) which has resulted
    in correctional cost reinvestment and legislation
    on prison and jail overcrowding
  • CT has a rich group of established community
    providers who have partnered in providing quality
    re-entry services to the criminal justice
    population for many years
  • This partnership and alternatives to
    incarceration have resulted in immense savings to
    the State of Connecticut. Estimated average
    community cost per person 3,000-8,000 vs.
    27,000-30,000 for incarceration

5
Premise and Need for Community Programs/Services
  • Approximately 96 of those incarcerated will
    return to the community
  • Period immediately following release is a
    critical transition point for offenders
  • Managing re-entry is critical so that fewer
    crimes are committed
  • Managing re-entry so that fewer crimes are
    committed enhances public safety

6
Premise of Need for Community Programming/Services
contd.
  • Managing re-entry so that there are fewer returns
    to prisonsignificant cost savings
  • Managing re-entry benefits families and
    communities
  • Coordinated approach to re-entry is effective in
    reducing recidivism
  • Churning is expensive

7
Issues with re-integration
  • Men and Women are re-entering with
  • Low levels of educational and vocational skills
  • Many with health related issues to include mental
    health and substance abuse
  • Serious housing, educational, employment, social
    and family needs
  • Most are returning to concentrated communities
    which are already deprived of resources and ill
    equipped to meet the challenges of this
    population. (Five towns reflect 50 of the
    incarcerated population)

8
Issues with re-integration contd.
  • Limited assistance in reintegration for end of
    sentence inmates (EOS) pose immediate public
    safety risks
  • Increased pressure on criminal justice system to
    solve the social ills within communities
  • Significant collateral impact

9
Issues with re-integration contd.
  • Persistent pressure for a tougher response to
    crime
  • More bi-furcation between urban and suburban
    areas
  • African American Ratio 121 in CT.
  • 88 of those overdosing on drugs according to
    DPHs 2004 report are white
  • Significant racial and ethnic disparity in the
    system

10
Employment/Training and Re-Entry
  • Challenges
  • Prison records diminish prospects for stable
    employment and reduces average wages
  • Time spent in prison is time spent out of the
    legitimate labor market
  • Stigma associated with having served time
  • Ex-Offenders are barred from working in certain
    types of jobs
  • Desired results
  • Employed ex-offenders are less likely to return
    to prison
  • Education and Job Training placements reduces the
    likelihood of re-incarceration

11
Health and Re-Entry
  • Challenges
  • Nationally 30-40 of offenders report chronic
    physical or mental health conditions, most
    commonly depression, asthma and high blood
    pressure
  • Higher rates of schizophrenia, depression,
    bipolar disorder and posttraumatic stress than
    general population (21 with significant needs in
    Connecticut)
  • Infectious diseases including HIV/AIDS are a
    significant problem
  • Incarceration makes offenders ineligible for
    Medicaid
  • Desired Results
  • Facilitating timely linkages between corrections
    and local mental health and physical care
    providers is critical
  • Services should meet the specialized and
    identified risk factors of the offender e.g. sex
    offender treatment, domestic violence, substance
    abuse

12
Housing and Re-Entry
  • Challenges
  • Housing is one of the most pressing concerns for
    ex-offenders
  • Without housing ex-offenders have trouble finding
    and maintaining stable employment
  • Without stable housing, ex-offenders are more
    likely to return to prison
  • Public Housing denies housing to ex-offenders
  • Some ex-offenders will find housing with family
    or friends, others in public shelters and many
    are homeless
  • Desired Result
  • Securing stable housing is critical to fostering
    successful re-entry
  • Appropriate housing should take into
    consideration a healthy and supportive environment

13
Substance Use and Re-Entry
  • Challenges
  • 88 of Connecticut offenders report substance
    abuse addiction or substance abuse having an
    impact on their incarceration
  • 26 receive treatment while incarcerated
  • Offenders identify substance abuse as being a
    critical factor associated with problems for
    employment, schooling, family, finances and
    criminal activity
  • Desired Results
  • Continuum of services from prison to community
    addressing substance abuse
  • Adequate inpatient and out patient evidenced
    based substance abuse services

14
Families and Re-Entry
  • Challenges
  • Incarceration has a major impact on the family
    unit
  • Family oriented services can appropriately
    strengthen ties between offenders and their loved
    ones
  • Desired Results
  • Strong family relationships can lead to improved
    employment outcomes and act as a protective
    factor against further criminal activity.
  • Need to be mindful and plan for issues such as
    domestic violence, risk of injury to children
    that may not be conducive to family reintegration

15
Communities and Re-Entry
  • Challenges
  • Large number of offenders returning to mostly 5
    communities in Connecticut
  • These communities are overwhelmed with managing
    this concentration
  • Limited resources to address the social ills that
    ex-offenders bring back to the community
  • Desired Results
  • Network of informal control, empowered and
    informed part of the solution family, religious
    organization, mentor
  • Strong partnerships between formal and informal
    controls
  • Information sharing between parole, probation and
    community providers strengthen the ability to
    identify, predict and possibly deter future
    criminal activity

16
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
  • Challenges
  • Offenders make poor choices in problem solving
  • Many offenders exhibit poor impulse and self
    control
  • Desired Results
  • Offenders must develop better reasoning skills,
    learn problem solving skills and improve self
    control
  • Teach offenders to anticipate problematic
    situations and develop alternate pro-social
    behavioral response to those situations
  • Crisis intervention with intense case management
    is critical
  • These services need to be administered close to
    release and reinforced post release

17
Program Evaluations
  • Goals
  • Research can help to inform on effectiveness of
    programs
  • Evaluations will produce evidence on the link
    between good re-entry and recidivism
  • Help in the efforts to develop future activities

18
Program Evaluations
  • Evaluations should look at both Process and
    Outcomes
  • Process evaluations- Does not evaluate
    effectiveness.
  • Identify issues that obstruct program
    participation and program operation- quantitative
    and qualitative
  • Identify clear operational details of the program
  • Outcomes
  • Does the program reduce recidivism?
  • Is the program cost effective?
  • Does the program produce benefits in terms of
    education, substance abuse reduction, employment,
    housing stability, family functioning and
    cognitive skills?

19
Public perception vs. Reality issuesArguments
for Alternatives
  • Time served is a significant component of the
    rising prison population
  • Time served does not influence recidivism
  • Increasing time served does not contribute to
    general deterrence
  • Time in prison is expensive
  • Longer prison terms erode community ties
  • The pressure to punish the offender beyond the
    established sentence can be counter-productive
  • We cannot imprison our way out of the problem

20
Sample Programs that work
  • Resettlement, established 1972- Long term case
    management services to female offenders 6 months
    prior to release and up to one year follow up
    services in the community.
  • U.S. Department of Labor re-entry grant.-Awarded
    to Connecticut under the Presidents Re-Entry
    Initiative. Focuses only on non-violent
    offenders for employment services.

21
Resettlement-est.1992
  • Have at least 4 to 6 months left on their
    sentence
  • Participant must actively participate in
    identifying needs and problems, setting goals to
    overcome issues and succeed.
  • Participant must develop a concrete transitional
    plan addressing goals for the future
  • Participant must help develop and sign a
    commitment contract
  • Ongoing individual and group guidance, support
    and encouragement
  • Basic needs offered housing, clothing,
    identification, access to employment services,
    substance abuse/mental health, and medical
    treatment.

22
U.S. Department of Labor Re-Entry Grant- March
2006-Present
  • 3 Year Grant to Community Partners in Action and
    a group of collaborative community partners
  • Department of Correction
  • Capital Workforce Development Board
  • Urban League of Greater Hartford
  • Families in Crisis
  • South Arsenal Neighborhood Development
    Corporation (SAND)
  • Co-Opportunity, Inc.
  • Our Piece of the Pie

23
Goals and Services of Prep Re-Entry
  • Seeks to strengthen the Greater Hartford
    offenders with an employment centered program
    that incorporates
  • Risk and Needs assessment
  • Case Management
  • Mentoring and Family intervention
  • Job Training
  • Job Development, placement and intervention
  • Substance Abuse
  • Other Transitional services

24
Results to Date-11-28-07U.S. DOL Re-Entry Grant
  • Participants enrolled-
    318
  • History of Alcohol or Substance Abuse- 224
  • Received Job Training Activities- 44
  • Received Work preparation activities- 306
  • Received Mentoring Services- 232
  • Job Placements-
    166
  • Recidivism Rate-
    28

25
Connecticuts Case Study
  • Conducted by
  • Public Safety Performance ( A project of the Pew
    Charitable Trusts)
  • and
  • The Council of State Governments
  • www.pewpublicsafety.org

26
Strategic Planning and Recommendations
  • 1. Coordinated and centralized re-entry system
    to include stakeholders
  • Correctional Staff
  • Community Corrections
  • Police
  • Judicial staff
  • Non-Profit Provider Network
  • Mental Health Providers
  • Local Workforce Boards
  • Victim Advocates

27
Strategic Planning and Recommendations
  • Coordinated system should include- Institutional
    phase, structured re-entry phase and community
    re-integration phase.
  • Coordinated communication system between
    Corrections and Community providers to ensure
    identification and provision of services based on
    risk and needs
  • Legislative and State Agencies- Intervention in
    assisting with siting residential facilities
  • Support for Non-Profits to enhance their service
    delivery and ensure stability of the provider
    network Constant loss of staff to state
    agencies, ability to hire staff with required
    qualifications
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com