RETURNING HOME The Challenge of Reuniting Returning Citizens with their Families and Communities A...

RETURNING HOMERETURNING HOMEThe Challenge of Reuniting Returning The Challenge of Reuniting Returning

Citizens with their Families and CommunitiesCitizens with their Families and Communities

A project of the International Community A project of the International Community

Corrections Association (ICCA)Corrections Association (ICCA)

Funded by the Public Welfare FoundationFunded by the Public Welfare Foundation

They’re coming home.They’re coming home.Let’s make sure they come home Let’s make sure they come home for good with appropriate for good with appropriate

structure, support, accountability and supervision.structure, support, accountability and supervision.

720,000 prisoners come home each year.720,000 prisoners come home each year.

They’re coming home.They’re coming home.Let’s give them the tools they need do it right.Let’s give them the tools they need do it right.

480,000 will be re-arrested without 480,000 will be re-arrested without re-entry services.re-entry services.

300,000 released prisoners get 300,000 released prisoners get sent backsent back to prison. to prison. THINK OF THE COST!THINK OF THE COST!

• Cost of imprisonment: $30,000 to $43,000 Cost of imprisonment: $30,000 to $43,000 • Lost tax revenues: $5,000 to $10,000 Lost tax revenues: $5,000 to $10,000 • Lost economic activity: $25,000 to $100,000+Lost economic activity: $25,000 to $100,000+

(Annual costs, per person)(Annual costs, per person)


• Insert local statsInsert local stats• Insert local statsInsert local stats• Insert local statsInsert local stats

• Communities lose productive citizensCommunities lose productive citizens• Neighborhoods lose a sense of safety and trustNeighborhoods lose a sense of safety and trust• Families are broken apartFamilies are broken apart

Cost: ImmeasurableCost: Immeasurable


• 7 to 9 million people circulate in and out of jails each year7 to 9 million people circulate in and out of jails each year

• 2.9 million are in jails and prisons right now2.9 million are in jails and prisons right now

• 97 % of all inmates 97 % of all inmates areare eventually released, eventually released, but…but…

• 67% will be re-arrested67% will be re-arrested

DO THE MATH!DO THE MATH!

We Have aWe Have a RE-ENTRY Crisis RE-ENTRY Crisis

Much of this is due to the fact that people Much of this is due to the fact that people leaving prison are released directly onto the leaving prison are released directly onto the

streets and without needed re-entry services.streets and without needed re-entry services.

The Re-arrest Rate is 67%The Re-arrest Rate is 67%

Some communities have found Some communities have found effective ways to address the crisis.effective ways to address the crisis.

We can We can allall benefit from their success. benefit from their success.

Community Corrections ProgramsCommunity Corrections Programs

Gradual re-entry programs and neighborhood settings that emphasize:Gradual re-entry programs and neighborhood settings that emphasize:

• • Drug MonitoringDrug Monitoring •• Supervision Supervision • • Structured MovementStructured Movement •• Public Safety Public Safety

Community Corrections ProgramsCommunity Corrections Programs

Gradual re-entry programs and neighborhood settings that emphasize:Gradual re-entry programs and neighborhood settings that emphasize:

• • TreatmentTreatment • • Skill developmentSkill development • • EmploymentEmployment • • Family reunification Family reunification

have been shown to cut recidivism rates significantly.have been shown to cut recidivism rates significantly.

Think of it: Of 720,000 citizens released from prison Think of it: Of 720,000 citizens released from prison every year, only 240,000 remain arrest free.every year, only 240,000 remain arrest free.

Insert Local StatsInsert Local Stats

Community corrections programs like these could help Community corrections programs like these could help up to up to 300,000 more citizens300,000 more citizens return home return home for good.for good.

Neighborhood-based programs that provide support, Neighborhood-based programs that provide support, supervision, training and treatment:supervision, training and treatment:

Insert Local StatsInsert Local Stats

Who are these people?

Insert Data – Local info

It’s Working in San Antonio It’s Working in San Antonio

PARTICIPANTS WIN: Chances of successful re-entry increased significantlyPARTICIPANTS WIN: Chances of successful re-entry increased significantly

COMMUNITY WINS: Crime reduced, safety increased, property values are COMMUNITY WINS: Crime reduced, safety increased, property values are unaffected or increasedunaffected or increased

With community support, Crosspoint Halfway House expanded With community support, Crosspoint Halfway House expanded services to help more citizens achieve successful reentryservices to help more citizens achieve successful reentry



It’s Working in Bellingham, Washington It’s Working in Bellingham, Washington

In this rural area of Washington State, community support made In this rural area of Washington State, community support made the difference in approving a 34-person capacity halfway housethe difference in approving a 34-person capacity halfway house

It’s Working in Rural ColoradoIt’s Working in Rural Colorado

Construction of a 70-bed halfway house in northeastern Colorado meant Construction of a 70-bed halfway house in northeastern Colorado meant jobs for local residents as well as support for returning citizensjobs for local residents as well as support for returning citizens

PARTICIPANTS WIN: Chances of successful re-entry increased from significantlyPARTICIPANTS WIN: Chances of successful re-entry increased from significantly


It’s Working in New HampshireIt’s Working in New Hampshire

Successful halfway house program from Massachusetts expanded to Successful halfway house program from Massachusetts expanded to Manchester with support of local police and probation departmentsManchester with support of local police and probation departments



It’s Working in HarlemIt’s Working in Harlem

Cleaning out trash and drug dealers, this abandoned “castle” was renovated Cleaning out trash and drug dealers, this abandoned “castle” was renovated to provide supervised housing for formerly homeless returnees.to provide supervised housing for formerly homeless returnees.



How it works: How it works: Half Way HouseHalf Way House• A positive transitional living environment.A positive transitional living environment.

• Residents pay room and board.Residents pay room and board.

• They also receive counseling and job training.They also receive counseling and job training.

• A gradual, fully secured, supported re-connection.A gradual, fully secured, supported re-connection.

How it works: How it works: Family Re-UnificationFamily Re-UnificationRe-entry Programs provide offenders with the opportunity to Re-entry Programs provide offenders with the opportunity to reunite with their spouses and children and work out legal reunite with their spouses and children and work out legal custody and family visitation issues. Re-entry planning includes:custody and family visitation issues. Re-entry planning includes:

• Supervised family reunificationSupervised family reunification

• Family therapyFamily therapy

• Parenting classesParenting classes

• Child support payment plansChild support payment plans

How it works: How it works: Day Reporting CenterDay Reporting CenterOffenders who qualify live at home and work but must Offenders who qualify live at home and work but must check in regularly at a Day Reporting Center where they check in regularly at a Day Reporting Center where they receive intensive supervision and services, including:receive intensive supervision and services, including:

• • Educational servicesEducational services

• • Vocational ServicesVocational Services

• • Treatment Treatment

• • Drug MonitoringDrug Monitoring

How it worked for MichaelHow it worked for MichaelLike many offenders with mental health issues and co-occurring substance abuse, Like many offenders with mental health issues and co-occurring substance abuse, Michael was not an intentional criminal. Now a client at the Alvis House Michael was not an intentional criminal. Now a client at the Alvis House Reflections Program, Michael, his wife, Christina and their children all participate Reflections Program, Michael, his wife, Christina and their children all participate in the family support program that is enabling Michael to lead a productive life. in the family support program that is enabling Michael to lead a productive life.

““Coming to this program is one of the best things I could have done. Coming to this program is one of the best things I could have done. I have a path to a new way of living now and my family and I understand I have a path to a new way of living now and my family and I understand each other a little better, too.” each other a little better, too.”

How it works for theHow it works for theChief of Police in San Antonio, TXChief of Police in San Antonio, TX

““These residents have curfews and are checked regularly for drug use These residents have curfews and are checked regularly for drug use and work hard not to jeopardize their status. Though crime does occur and work hard not to jeopardize their status. Though crime does occur in these neighborhoods, we have not associated any of the crimes in these neighborhoods, we have not associated any of the crimes with the halfway houses or their residents.”with the halfway houses or their residents.”

--Michael Helle, President, San Antonio Police Officers Association

““Our own experience demonstrates that Crosspoint’s around the clock staffing, constant attention to safety and security, and its ability to provide accountability for its residents, all combine to make Crosspoint transitional homes a safe addition to a neighborhood.”

How it works for theHow it works for theSex Offender Management (SOM) Team Sex Offender Management (SOM) Team

in King Countyin King County““SOM promotes public understanding that ‘not in my neighborhood’ is not a SOM promotes public understanding that ‘not in my neighborhood’ is not a viable solution. Instead, communities that are aware and monitor convicted sex viable solution. Instead, communities that are aware and monitor convicted sex offenders are safer and more empowered. An offender who is invisible to the offenders are safer and more empowered. An offender who is invisible to the neighborhood is a threat in hiding. Increased visibility and ties to the neighborhood is a threat in hiding. Increased visibility and ties to the community help make sex offenders more accountable for their actions and community help make sex offenders more accountable for their actions and decrease the likelihood of re-offending”decrease the likelihood of re-offending”

-- Mary Ellen Stone, King County Sexual Assault -- Mary Ellen Stone, King County Sexual Assault Resource Center Resource Center Seattle, WashingtonSeattle, Washington

Leadership of GovernorsLeadership of Governors• • LA.: Gov. Jindal press release: “hammer away at dubious LA.: Gov. Jindal press release: “hammer away at dubious distinction of highest incarceration rate in the world” with day distinction of highest incarceration rate in the world” with day reporting, jail reentry & work releasereporting, jail reentry & work release

-- Gov. Bobby Jindal-- Gov. Bobby Jindal

Leadership of GovernorsLeadership of Governors• • MI.: Granholm’s advisory: Reduce prisons 10% with nonviolent MI.: Granholm’s advisory: Reduce prisons 10% with nonviolent and geriatric release, invest in probation and parole staff and and geriatric release, invest in probation and parole staff and reentry. “Decide who we’re afraid of and who we’re mad at.”reentry. “Decide who we’re afraid of and who we’re mad at.”

-- Gov. Jennifer Granholm-- Gov. Jennifer Granholm

How it works for neighborhoods like yoursHow it works for neighborhoods like yoursHalfway house residents perform community services including:Halfway house residents perform community services including:

• • Graffiti RemovalGraffiti Removal

• • Lawn mowingLawn mowing

• • Trash pickup Trash pickup

Addressing community fears and misconceptionsAddressing community fears and misconceptions • • Community opposition is the single largest barrier to increasing community Community opposition is the single largest barrier to increasing community

capacity for transitioning people from prison back to their homes.capacity for transitioning people from prison back to their homes.

• • The chief causes of this opposition are natural fears and The chief causes of this opposition are natural fears and concerns for safety, but also misconceptions and concerns for safety, but also misconceptions and

biases based on myths, stereotypes and unfounded assumptionsbiases based on myths, stereotypes and unfounded assumptions

Myth:Myth:Re-entry Programs lead to Re-entry Programs lead to increased crime in the increased crime in the neighborhood.neighborhood.

Reality:Reality:Re-entry Programs provide supervision Re-entry Programs provide supervision and support for people who might and support for people who might otherwise go astray. Crime actually is otherwise go astray. Crime actually is reduced in neighborhoods with Re-entry reduced in neighborhoods with Re-entry Programs.Programs.

Myth:Myth:Halfway Houses lower Halfway Houses lower property values.property values.

Reality:Reality:Most Halfway Houses are major Most Halfway Houses are major renovations of existing properties, and renovations of existing properties, and are meticulously maintained. They are meticulously maintained. They almost always raise the value of the almost always raise the value of the property they are in. They have no effect property they are in. They have no effect on, or increase the value of those around on, or increase the value of those around them. them.

Myth:Myth:Re-entry Program residents Re-entry Program residents will bring drugs and dope-will bring drugs and dope-dealing into the neighborhood.dealing into the neighborhood.

Reality:Reality:Clients are randomly and regularly Clients are randomly and regularly searched and tested for drugs and searched and tested for drugs and alcohol, with severe consequences for alcohol, with severe consequences for any use -- almost always resulting in a any use -- almost always resulting in a resident’s temporary or permanent resident’s temporary or permanent removal from the program.removal from the program.

We appreciate your concern and invite We appreciate your concern and invite you to get involved:you to get involved:

• • Talk to your local law enforcement officialsTalk to your local law enforcement officials

• • Take a tour of your local reentry facilityTake a tour of your local reentry facility

• • Visit the website: www.iccaweb.orgVisit the website: www.iccaweb.org

Second Chances Selected Bibliography Cox, Stephen M. “A Study of Reconviction Rates of Discharged Inmates from theConnecticut Department of Correction.” Central Connecticut State University, 2006.Fehr, Larry M. “Review of Recent Evaluation Research on Community Residential Reentry Centers.” Journal of Community Corrections, Winter 2005-2006. Daniels, Timothy and Toumpas, Ernest, Certified Appraisers. “General Real Estate Market Study of Properties Located within proximity of North End House.” Concord, New Hampshire, December, 2004.Drake, Elizabeth. “Does Participation in Washington's Work Release Facilities Reduce Recidivism?” Washington State Institute for Public Policy. November 2007. Eisenberg, Michael. “The Second Biennial Report on the Performance of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Rehabilitation Tier Programs.” Criminal Justice Policy Council. State of Texas. February, 2003. Engel, Len. “Priorities and Public Safety: Reentry and the Rising Costs of our Corrections System.” The Crime and Justice Institute, Community Resources for Justice, for The Boston Foundation, 2009. Fehr, Larry M. “Literature Review of Impacts to Communities in Siting Correctional Facilities.” Washington Council on Crime and Delinquency. Seattle, Washington, July, 1995. Feldman, Lisa. “Studies on Halfway Houses.” Produced by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice and commissioned by DC Prisoners Legal Services. The full report is available from the Justice Policy Institute, Washington, DC. January 1, 2002. Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy. “The Impact of Supportive Housing on Surrounding Neighborhoods: Evidence from New York City.” New York University School of Law, 2008.

Gilbert, Michael J. “Rethinking Our Policy Responses to Crime and Reentry.” University of Texas at San Antonio, Power Point presentation. June, 2010. Gregg Jordan and Associates. “Letter to John Larivee, Community Resources for Justice, December 2, 2004.” Corporate Real Estate Services, Boston, Massachuetts.Hetz-Burrell, Nicole and English, Kim. “Community Corrections in Colorado: A Study of Program Outcomes and Recidivism, FY00-FY04.” Office of Research and Statistics, Division of Criminal Justice, Department of Public Safety, State of Colorado. May 2006. John Howard Society of Alberta. “Halfway Houses.” 2001 Latessa, Edward J., Lovins, Lori Brusman and Smith, Paula. “Follow-up Evaluation of Ohio's Community Based Correctional Facility and Halfway House Programs – Outcome Study.” Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati. February 2010. Levin, Marc, Esq. “Texas Criminal Justice Policy Reform: Lower Crime, Lower Cost.” Texas Public Policy Foundation Center for Effective Justice. January, 2010. Levin, Marc A., Esq. “Thinking Outside the Cell: Solutions for Public Safety, Victims and Taxpayers.” Texas Public Policy Foundation, Power Point presentation. December, 2009.

Pryzybylski, Roger. “What Works? Effective Recidivism Reduction and Risk Focused Prevention Programs: A Compendium of Evidence-Based Options for Preventing New and Persistent Criminal Behavior.” RKC Group for the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice. February 2008. Schmitt, John, Warner, Kris, and Gupta, Sarika. “The High Budgetary Cost of Incarceration.” Center for Economic and Policy Research. Washington, D.C., June, 2010.________________. “Texas Residential Programs: Community Corrections Facilities.” Report to House Corrections Interim Committee. Texas Department of Criminal Justice. TDCJ – CJAD. July 16, 2002. Vuong, Linh, Hartney, Christopher, Krisberg, Barry, and Marchionna, Susan. “The Extravagance of Imprisonment Revisited.” National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Oakland, California, January, 2010. Wilson, Mike, and Krsulisch, Lisa. “Cost-Benefit Analysis for Justice Policy: A Step-by-Step Guide.” Vera Institute of Justice, January, 2011.Worcel, Sonia D., Burrus, Scott W.M. and Finigan, Michael W. “Study of Substance-Free Transitional Housing and Community Corrections in Washington County, Oregon.” Document Number 225802; funded by U.S. Department of Justice grant, Award Number 2005-DD-BX-1009. NPC Research. 2009.

RETURNING HOME The Challenge of Reuniting Returning Citizens with their Families and Communities A...

Documents

Transcript of RETURNING HOME The Challenge of Reuniting Returning Citizens with their Families and Communities A...