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