Forces of Progress at Work

Transcription

1 Probation and Parole in the Year 2020 Presented by: Danny Hunter, Director of Field Operations Beth Oxford, Director of Parole Board Members: L. Gale Buckner, Chair Robert E. Keller, Vice-Chair Garfield Hammonds, Jr. Milton Buddy Nix, Jr. Garland R. Hunt, Esq State Board of Pardons and Paroles Forces of Progress at Work Driving the community supervision profession toward self-examination/ continuous improvement Unstoppable, but can be guided Will cause a massive shift in the approach to community supervision from a Soft Science to a Hard Science 1

2 What are the Forces of Progress? 2

3 Performance Accountability Well entrenched expectation that the Government will operate like a business Greater demands for proof of program effectiveness High profile crimes generate greater scrutiny 3

4 Little hard evidence exists as to why supervision may not be as effective as it could be Amy Solomon, Does Parole Supervision Work?, Perspectives, Spring 2006 Reasons for Ineffectiveness Fundamental flaw in the approach to management of community supervision agencies: Imbalance between management of supervision practices vs. supervision outputs No universally accepted outcome measure adopted by all CS agencies Dearth of performance management dialogue by P&P practitioners 4

5 Performance Measures Challenge Identify a single most important performance measure which best defines the achievement of our mission Focuses staff on the achievement of a single measurable output that is dependent upon: Sound release decisions Effective supervision practices Performance Measures Challenge Transcends the intermediate process measures and outcomes that community supervision agencies have traditionally relied upon Makes a bold and easily understood statement about what community supervision should be reasonably expected to accomplish Defines the purpose for the existence of a community supervision agency 5

6 Mission Statement To enhance public safety by: Making informed parole decisions Transitioning offenders back into the community Primary Performance Measure Percentage of parolees who successfully complete parole supervision Formula prescribed by BJS Nationally documented measure of success being published by BJS 6

7 Critical importance of adopting BJS parole completion rate as single most important measure was illustrated by asking ourselves: What is the successful completion rate of? The Nation Our State Our regions Our field offices Our individual parole/ probation officers Bureau of Justice Statistics 2006 successful completion rates for the nation: Parole 44% Probation 57% Parole Probation

8 Obstacles to Improving Effectiveness Fear of accountability Lack of clear linkage between Agency mission and performance target Lack of immediate, reliable feedback which measures outputs and mission achievement Leadership Philosophy / Practice 1. Immediacy of performance feedback is essential 2. Process and outputs must be measured and compiled at every level of the organization: - Individual - Region -Unit -State 3. Primary target of measurement must be visible for all to see 8

9 Leadership Philosophy / Practice 4. Allow spirit of competition to evolve internally (competition against the goal, not each other) 5. Share successful supervision strategies between units 6. Recognize & reward high levels of performance 7. Differentiate expectations of performance based on environmental factors 8. Clarify the causal linkage between practice and output Completion Rates State, Region, District 9

10 Parole Completion Rates by Office from Highest to Lowest Monthly Activity Supervision Summary 10

11 Research Findings Evidence Based Practices (EBP s) are driving the development of supervision strategies Re-entry movement has channeled $ into research capacity Technology advancements have enhanced research capabilities and sources of information 11

12 Georgia Parole Board Research Project Funded by NIJ grant Data analysis conducted by Institute for Applied Research, Atlanta Georgia Research Project One of the largest studies of parolees ever conducted 39,000 parolees over 1 million supervision activity data items Goal Identify patterns of parolee behavior while under supervision that lead to failure or success 12

13 Interim Findings There are sequential patterns of Parolee behavior that lead to technical violations and arrest / revocation. Dynamic Risk Factors Positive Drug Screens For every increase in the ratio of positive to total tests, there is a 33% increase in the likelihood of arrest for a misdemeanor or felony When the ratio of positives to total tests declines, there is an equivalent reduction in the likelihood of arrest Positive drug screens are also correlated with significant increase in the risk of arrest for other technical violations 2x 13

14 Technical Violations A 5% increase in risk of arrest for each time: Changing residence without approval Not attending treatment program Not following P.O. instructions Not reporting to the P.O. as instructed The effect of these violations is cumulative for each occurrence: 5 violations = 25% increase in risk Electronic Monitoring Violations Indicate an increased risk of a positive drug test EM violations in the first two quarters of supervision predict increased risk of misdemeanor arrest (15%) and other technical violations (26%) 14

15 Employment A parolee who is fired, laid off, or quits his job is predictive of a felony arrest and revocation of release Of the three, being fired holds the greatest increase in risk of a felony arrest at 26% 2x as likely to have parole revoked What activities improve odds of success or Good Outcome? 15

16 Treatment Programs Enrollment in a program reduces the probability of an arrest: Educational program - reduced by 17% Substance Abuse program - reduced by 7% Cog Skills program (MRT) reduced by 11% Attendance is critical every attendance at any of these programs reduces probability of arrest by 1% per attendance Employment For everyday that a parolee is employed, it reduces the risk for committing a new felony offense by 1% per day This effect is cumulative 100 days of employment = 100% reduction in risk of arrest 16

17 Research Conclusions Technical violations ARE predictive of a new arrest or revocation Treatment programs and employment reduce the risk of a new arrest or revocation 17

18 Rapid Technological Advances Permeate home and business Inescapable: Automobiles Cellphones GPS technology Surveillance cameras Electronic case management systems Public demands immediacy / transparency of information and response: Reality TV Vehicle pursuits Disasters Technologies will emerge that support creation of methods to anticipate Future Crime Primitive Methods Already Developed Integrate technology & research Georgia automated risk assessment instrument Utilizes findings of previous research on 6,000 parolees Based on PO data input into electronic case management system Daily automated recalculation of parolee risk Risk score 1-10, automatically assigned to case 18

19 Arrested for New Offense by Risk Level 19

20 Immediate Future Development of Protocols: Patterns of behavior detected electronically Behaviors targeted based on research findings Within a specified window of time Triggers electronic notification to PO / manager of increased likelihood of bad outcome Requires PO to intervene immediately Requires manager to review immediately to ensure intervention occurs 20

21 Why is intervention important? Intervention IS Crime Prevention Why? Because we know the findings of research that lead to technical violations / arrest Intervention interrupts the spiraling cycle of violations that leads to new crimes Intervention can take the form of a treatment program or arrest Intervention intent is to stabilize behavior / remove threat of crime occurrence 21

22 What is the desired Intervention Outcome? Successful transition into community How is it measured? Successful parole completion rate. Successful parole completion rate measurement will drive agency philosophy and PO efforts towards crime prevention and parolee success Distant Future Intervention Protocols Notification will include a statement of the predictive likelihood of arrest / revocation / future crime Notification will prescribe the course of action to take that will reduce the possibility of future crime 22

23 23

24 What About Intermediate Sanctions? Verbal Reprimands 70,198 occurrences Most frequently employed sanction No significance in reducing odds of revocation, new arrest, + drug screens, or other violations of conditions Written Reprimands 9,458 occurrences No significance in reducing odds of revocation, new arrest, + drug screens, or other violations of conditions 24

25 What sanctions DO work? Administrative Hearings Reduces risk of arrest for new crime by 24%, and reduces the risk of revocation Short Term Detention Reduces the risk for first misdemeanor arrest by 11% and first positive drug screen by 43% How do we incorporate these sanctions into our supervision strategy? Conduct administrative hearing on technical violators Issue warrants for arrest when high risk behavior escalates Use administrative hearing as an opportunity to redirect behavior after detention Continuation under supervision after admin hearing with definitive plan for corrective action 25

26 What are the results? 26

27 Month / Year September-07 October-07 November-07 December-07 January-08 February-08 March-08 April-08 May-08 June-08 July-08 August-08 Totals Averages State Board of Pardons and Paroles Revocations / Technical Only 12 Months: Sept 2007 to August 2008 Total Revocations New Criminal Offenses Technical Violations Only % Technical Only Revocations 18.6% 16.0% 13.5% 14.3% 14.1% 14.1% 12.9% 18.5% 15.7% 19.0% 13.1% 12.0% 15.2% 15.2% Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Parolee Arrests For New Crimes By Month April 2004 June April-04 July-04 Oct Jan April-05 July-05 Oct Jan April-06 July-06 Oct Jan April-07 July-07 Oct Jan April-08 27

28 Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Improving Parole Completion Rates = Costs Avoided 28

29 Contact Information Danny Hunter, Director of Field Operations State Board of Pardons and Paroles 2 MLK Jr. Drive, Suite 458, East Tower Atlanta, Georgia, 30334, Tel Danny_Hunter@pap.state.ga.us Beth Oxford, Director of Parole State Board of Pardons and Paroles 2 MLK Jr. Drive, 5 th floor, East Tower Atlanta, Georgia, 30334, Tel Beth_Oxford@pap.state.ga.us 29