Responding to Violations Through Evidence-Based Practices

1. Responding to Violations Through Evidence-Based Practices Presented to The Ohio Justice Alliance for Community Corrections Lori Francescon – Franklin County Adult Probation Michael Anderson & Brigid Slaton – ODRC Phillip Nunes – Volunteers of America of Greater Ohio October 12, 2012

2. Why do we need to be concerned about responding to violations? • The United States has a significant problem with local jails and prison overcrowding • Local jails and state prisons need to curb new intakes, most notably for technical violations • Typically, prison is not the solution • Evidenced suggests that positive and negative reinforcers should be applied to enhance behavior change

3. Ohio’s Statistics • On October 1, 2010, the ODRC reached a recent high inmate population of 51,273 • As of Sept 2012, the inmate population was 49,430. • 38,630…the number our prisons are designed to hold today in Ohio • 127%.......current inmate population relative to capacity • HB 86 reforms expected to reduce the prison population by 2,000-3,000 by FY 2015 • In 1989 our prison system in Ohio was at 28,076 • Goal….To reduce the prison population to 48,000 by July 1, 2013 while maintaining public safety

4. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

5. Prior to Violations: • Use validated risk assessment (ORAS) • Develop tailored case plan • Target risk factors • Proactive approach is ideal=reduce risk that can lead to violation behavior

6. When addressing violations: Adhere to a timeframe • Ten day window to respond to violation behavior • Take risk level into consideration • Response should address violation behavior and consider severity • Use progressive sanctions

7. ODRC- Adult Parole Authority • Introduced a sanction grid to increase consistency (2005) • Grid incorporates risk • Provides more opportunities for progressive sanctioning • Variety of evidence based sanctions to address the violation behavior (direct service, community providers, etc)

9. Sanction GridAdult Parole Authority • Emphasizes consistency in responding to violation behavior • Good for tracking violations • Takes severity into consideration • Decision making tool • Can override- grid is a guide • Tool for officers, supervisors, and regional administrators

10. Grid Premise • Keep offenders who commit non violent violations in the community longer through community based sanctions • Incorporates the Parole Board prior to administrative hearing • Higher risk offenders who commit high level violations get fewer opportunities in the community • Low risk offenders who commit low level violations are given many chances to modify behavior

11. Evaluation of grid Brian Martin and Steve VanDine- ODRC through NIJ grant • Does increase consistency as intended • Programming sanctions contribute to more favorable outcomes • Surveillance sanctions have no favorable impact on outcomes • Risk and need principle should be adhered to- low risk offenders should be on minimal reporting and high risk offenders should receive more interventions

12. APA Responses • Programming • HWH • Reporting • Direct Services/T4C • Risk/needs principle • EBP Tools/Carey Guides • Administrative Hearing

13. Violation Hearing Statistics ODRC Statistics Reduction in Violation Hearings • FY 2009 2,794 • FY 2010 848 • FY 2011 953 • FY 2012 1,042

14. Factors to Consider • Risk Score • Violation Behavior • Previous Sanctions & Compliance • Support in the Community • Obstacles to overcome • Adult Parole Authority • Attitude of Offender

15. Responses Parole Board • Increase in the duration of the term of supervision (PRC only); • Electronic monitoring • Revocation of release • Imposition of Prison Term Sanction • Monitored Time upon expiration of the available Prison Term Sanction

16. Responses Parole Board • Termination of post release control upon expiration of all available prison sanction time • Halfway House • Community Based Correctional Facility • Continued under supervision

17. Community Based Correctional Facility • Pilot began in 2009 at Rivercity CBCF • Working Agreement with each facility • EBP programming versus prison with no programming • No pending criminal charges • Moderate, High and Very High Risk • Attitude

18. Parole Board Summons • Graduated Sanction utilized by supervising officer • Review EBP tool already issued • Issue Homework • Emphasize & support parole officer • “last chance agreement”

19. Efforts to Reduce Violation Behavior • Measuring recidivism rates by region and unit • Providing staff with evidence based tools and techniques- MI, EPICS, T4C • Regions are incorporating strategies to adhere to risk/need principles, increase family involvement, and incorporate the use of positive incentives

20. EBP Outcome Measures Calendar Year 2012 Statewide Data: Family Involvement (FI) = 39,145 Positive Incentives (PI) = 37,914 EBP Tools Utilized = 15,321

21. Recidivism Data 3 year recidivism data for Post Release Control offenders released in 2008: • Tech return rate = 7.89% 6.9% points since 2004 • New Crime rate = 26.12% 4.28% points since 2004 • Total Return rate = 34.01% 11.18% points since 2004

22. Franklin County Adult Probation Department

23. Franklin County Adult Probation Department “THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE IN ADOPTING BETTER INTERVENTIONS ISN’T IDENTIFYING THE INTERVENTIONS WITH THE BEST EVIDENCE, SO MUCH AS IT IS CHANGING OUR EXISTING SYSTEMS TO APPROPRIATELY SUPPORT THE NEW INNOVATIONS” Source: Crime and Justice Institute; Implementing EBP in Community Corrections April 30, 2004

24. Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions *Crime and Justice Institute April 20, 2004 1. Assess Actuarial Risk/Needs 2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation 3. Target Interventions -Risk Principle: Prioritize supervision and treatment resources for higher risk offenders -Need Principle: Target interventions to criminogenic needs - Responsivity Principle: Be responsive to temperament, learning style, motivation culture and gender when assigning programs -Dosage: Structure 40-70% of high risk offenders time for 3-9 months -Treatment: Integrate treatment in to the full sentence/sanction requirements

25. Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions • Skill Train w Directed Practice • Increase Positive Reinforcement • Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities • Measure Relevant Processes/Practices 8. Provide Measurement Feedback

26. Principles of Cognitive Behavioral Programming • Thinking Affects Behavior • Anti-social, distorted, unproductive, irrational thinking causes anti-social or unproductive behavior • Thinking can be influenced and changed • We can change how we feel and behave by changing what we think • Thoughts---Feelings---Behaviors University of Cincinnati Facilitator Training in CBT

27. Tools for Changing Behavior • Cost-Benefit Analysis weigh pros/cons positive reinforcements/negative consequences • Thinking Reports link thoughts and behaviors identify triggers • Functional Analysis teach offender to assess, manage and evaluate attempts to change behavior • Skill Building Role playing Cognitive Behavioral curriculums EQUIP Getting Motivated to Change Carey Guides EPICS University of Cincinnati, Facilitator Training in CBT

28. Responding to Non-Compliance/Violations Administrative Hearings: An informal hearing between the probationer and a Classification Manager in order to sanction or provide guidelines to insure compliance with the conditions of supervision. It is an alternative to revocation proceedings when lesser alternatives have been exhausted or ineffective and/or when a probationer is in violation of the rules of probation.

29. Administrative Hearings HISTORY • 1997- Initiate to address minor violations • Reduce docket and streamline consistency • Probation Violations filed w the court for Revocation Franklin County Common Pleas Court = 12 judges/ 12 philosophies (currently 17 judges)

30. Administrative Hearings(history cont) 2004 • Improved the process to include a waiver and 3 day notice of hearing and violations - comply with Morrissey vs. Brewer, Gagnon V. Scarpelli • Incorporate EBP into supervision strategies

31. Responding to Violations Staffing • Technical violations • Arrest Administrative Hearings • Office Hearings • Jail Hearings Recommendations • submit to court for approval

32. Franklin County Adult Probation Administrative Hearing Notice I have been notified by the Franklin County Adult Probation Department that I allegedly violated my community control sanctions/Intervention in Lieu of Conviction following my conviction/LLC for instant offense. I understand that I have the right to have my violations heard before the court. I also have the right to agree to an Administrative Hearing before the Franklin County Adult Probation Department. I have the right to attorney representation in either hearing. I understand that if I agree to an Administrative Hearing before the Franklin County Adult Probation Department, my community control /Intervention in Lieu of Conviction conditions may be modified upon approval from the Judge, with additional conditions/sanctions than were originally ordered by the court. If at the conclusion of the Administrative Hearing, I disagree with any additional conditions/sanctions recommended, I may still request to have a court hearing before the Judge. I fully understand my right to a court hearing and my right to be represented by an attorney. Instead of a court hearing, I voluntarily agree to proceed with an Administrative Hearing before the Franklin County Adult Probation Department ________________________ ______________________ Probationer Attorney I voluntarily agree to proceed with an Administrative Hearing before the Franklin County Adult Probation Department without an attorney present. __________________________ _____________________________ Probationer Classification Manager

33. Franklin County Adult Probation Administrative Hearing Form and Waiver • You are ordered to appear on 12/21/2010, at 09:30 AM. • The hearing will be conducted at the Franklin County Adult Probation Department. You may have this hearing postponed for good cause. You have the right to be notified in writing of this hearing at least three days before the hearing. You may waive this right if you so desire. • Waiver of Three Day Service: __________________________________________________ • Signature Date • Date: 11/19/2010 • Probationer: PDNO: 94515 P.O.: Catherine Scott Judge: David Fais • Open Cases 09 CR 2281 Theft F5 • Placement Date was 1/28/2010 Scheduled Termination Date is 1/27/2015 • Court Conditions Completed: No • Court Conditions: Chemical Dependency Evaluation, Compact Conditions, Court Costs, No New Law Violations, Obtain/Maintain Employment, Random Drug Screens, Restitution • Jail Time Credit: 0 days-Sentencing Financial Obligation: $218.00-ct. costs • Last Payment : 3-18-10 $12,300.74-rest. • Verified Employment: No $12,518.00-total • Reason For Review: • Failure to Comply: The defendant has failed to make any payments towards his court costs or restitution since 3/10. The defendant has failed to undergo a drug/alcohol assessment. AGREEMENT/RESOLUTION: The defendant was present for an administrative hearing on this date. Due to the violation(s) as stated above, the following recommendation/sanction shall be imposed upon the Judge’s approval: • Recommended Additional Conditions:The defendant shall undergo a drug/alcohol assessment and follow any recommended aftercare. The defendant shall obtain/maintain verifiable employment. The defendant needs to pay at least $260.00 per month towards his costs until his costs have been PIF. He has agreed to pay at least $200.00 per month. • Probationer_________________________ Date________Classification Manager _______________________ Date_______

34. Administrative Hearings2011 • Total Administrative Hearings= 1,594 • Office Administrative Hearings = 1,092 • Jail Administrative Hearings = 502 Administrative Hearings M-1 = 98 F-5 = 850 M-2 = 2 F-4 = 364 M-3 = 1 F-3 = 250 M-4 = 1 F-2 = 40 F-1 = 18

35. Evidence Based Practices in Criminal Justice • Interventions within corrections are considered EFFECTIVE when they REDUCE offender RISK and subsequent RECIDIVISM and therefore make a POSITIVE LONG TERM contribution to PUBLIC SAFETY • Justice Institute; April 30, 1994

36. Volunteers of America of Greater Ohio: Responding to Violations

37. Background: • Volunteers of America of Greater Ohio has several sites: • Mansfield: 130 bed capacity community corrections facility • Dayton: 128 bed capacity community corrections facility • Cincinnati: 150 bed capacity community corrections facility

38. Populations Served • Transitional Control Offenders at all three sites • Direct Court Placements within 32 county catchment areas • Adult Parole Authority Sanctioned Offenders (probation / parole and PRC) • County Probation Sanctioned Offenders

39. Staff Training on Effective Disapproval • In October 2010 conducted first training with all staff at all three sites on effective disapproval and the need to improve creating an environment of change. This included…. • As employees working in a community “correctional” environment we must move away from the stereotypical roles of correctional punishers to viewing ourselves as “agents of change”. We must achieve this through effective role modeling and rewarding behaviors to reinforce pro-social actions.

40. Changing Environment Training: • We must create an environment that is geared towards repetitive reinforcement of positive or pro-social behaviors…this can only be achieved by reinforcing such behavior. • In changing our environment towards reinforcing behavior on a regular basis, we will find ourselves having to punish less and create a more positive environment for our staff and clients to work / live in.

41. Quality Model Qualifications of Staff for Effective Environment Training: • Personable • Objective • Collaborative • Competent • Reward pro-social behaviors • Punish anti-social behaviors • Demonstrates pro-social behaviors and attitudes

42. High Quality Relationships Improve Likelihood of Behavior Change Training • Behavior is reinforced through environmental cues • Demonstrate respect • Demonstrate enthusiasm • Demonstrate concern • Teach • Reward • Punish

43. Rule Violations and Reward Reporting • All Staff are required to write incident report for non-discretionary moderate to high risk violations. (Some discretion for minor offenses such as unmade bed…etc) • All Staff are required to write reward reports on those clients who have done something above and beyond that requires recognition.

44. Behavior Review Committee • In 2010 established a Behavior Review Committee who reviews all reward and incident reports • Rewards where appropriate • Serving as Due Process Format, if needed • Allows those who are having difficultly to appear in front of the BRC to present and receive feedback

45. Sanctioning Processes • In 2010 we adopted the 100 point (current) Transitional Control Sanction Grid for all populations served • Currently, those clients who receive 50 points, we are to have a probation / parole officer come in to have an intervention with client and assigned case worker, (except Transitional Control Offenders • Offenders can also equally have point deductions for positive pro-social behaviors

46. Types of Rewards Examples: • Reward Sack Meals (extra meals beyond required 3) • BBQ / Cookouts for Residents earning • Pizza Party for qualifying clients • Non Tangible Praise • Point Reduction • Special or Extended Visitation Time • Extra Pass Hours • Accelerated Level System Moves • Accelerated Release Dates (Except for TC)

47. Types of Rewards Examples.. • Recreation Passes with approved family • Can order in delivered food at set times / days • Phone pass to use agency phone • Recreation outings • Sleeping in • Note: VOAGO uses commissary funds to purchase rewards for client. • Note: All rewards are attempted to be tailored to what is deemed a reward by the client

48. Behavior Management • Contracted with University of Cincinnati in 2010 to revamp all programs and curriculums • Currently in final processes approving more in depth Behavior Management Plan to include: • Improve Consistency of Reinforcers and Sanctions • Aligning with pending new TC Behavior Plan in concert with ODRC • Continue to develop and streamline level progression based on behavior assessments and rewards • Enhancing Rewards List • Streamline eligibility criteria for reinforcers

49. QUESTIONS???????????

50. Contact information Lori Francescon lori_francescon@fccourts.org Michael Anderson michael.e.anderson@odrc.state.oh.us Brigid Slaton brigid.slaton@odrc.state.oh.us Phillip Nunes phillip.nunes@voago.org