1. Strategies to Decrease Technical Violators From Being Sent to Prison:
Ralph Fretz, Ph.D.
Community Education Centers
FADAA/FCCMH
August 7, 2013
This seminar will touch on the scope of the current parole problem in US, brief history, use of graduated sanctions, assessment/treatment for ½ way back, RAC, and Research

2. Agenda Present Brief History of Technical Violator (TV) influx
Review of research on State's responses to TVs
Brief description of STICS
Describe New Jersey's response to the TV influx and research on this response
DMS-V and adaptive programming
For copies of powerpoint, me at

3. State’s Method of Dealing with Recidivism

4. State’s Responses to Recidivism- Mr. O’s and Malaysia’s solution

5. Scope of the Problem
The following stats were drawn from the Florida DOC website for the year:
45% of offenders on supervision successfully completed their term
15% of Florida supervisees were revoked for new arrest
23% of Florida supervisees were revoked for a technical violation.
In raw numbers for :
20,652 Technical Probation Violators revoked–usually due to a relapse
13,443 Probationers were revoked for new arrest
40,811 prison admissions were not due to a new sentence

6. Community Supervision in the US
Community Supervision was originally designed as incentive to assist offenders' reentry.
Focus of Community Supervision has shifted to long-term management of offenders with isolation and containment as result.
Main tool for management-Community Supervision revocation.
What happened? Community Supervision became flooded with a tsunami of offenders due to the "get tough" on crime approaches of the 80s and 90s, but no effective method to deal with this influx.

7. Increase in Community Supervision Reincarceration Rates
Factors related to the Technical Community Supervision Violator (TV) reincarceration increase:
Lack of treatment and services in the community
Lack of graduated sanctions
Lack of standards for Technical Community Supervision revocation
Revocation often dependent on an individual Community Supervision officer's definition
Reasons for revocation to prison can vary state to state, county to county, and even within the same Community Supervision office.
Central function of Community Supervision has been to manage dangerous criminals. Individual Community Supervision officers determine what Community Supervisiones are most dangerous. Determinations of who is dangerous varies between Community Supervision officers and Community Supervision districts. Some attempt has been made to objective risk assessment.

8. Steen and Opsal Findings (2007)
4 State sample- Kentucky, Michigan, New York, and Utah in 2000
Sample size was large- N=30,766
Results:
Race x Gender was significant factor- Black males were 50% more likely than White males to have their Community Supervision revoked for technical reasons
Time on Community Supervision was significant- each successful year on Community Supervision reduced possibility of new charge by 33% and technical violation by 40%
Females and older offenders were more successful
Offenders with prior felonies and property offences were least successful
For reincarceration, property and sex offenders were highest, but sex offenders were least likely to be violated for new offense
Blacks with no priors were 10% more likely to be revoked than Whites with no priors. For new offenses, Black females were treated more leniently than White females.
For technical violations, female Blacks and Whites were revoked at same rate. Black males were violated for technical reasons at a much higher rate than White males. Combination of race and gender act in concert to significantly impact the treatment of Black males.
States varied in their responses to revocation suggesting that Community Supervision revocation decisions should be analyzed at the microlevel (individual parole officers, counties, jurisdictions) rather than macrolevel (combining States into aggregates).

9. Risk-Need-Responsivity
Risk Principle-Assess Risk to determine intensity and dosage of treatment/services
High risk-More Treatment/More Services
Low Risk-Minimal to No Treatment/Services
Low risk offenders who receive treatment may actually have worse outcomes than no treatment
Risk levels determined by reliable and valid instruments used by properly trained staff. e.g. Me vs. a carpenter with a piece of wood and a saw

10. Risk-Need-Responsivity
Need Principle- Criminogenic needs are treatment targets
Need determines what should be the focus of treatment.
Two main types of needs-criminogenic and non-criminogenic
Focus on needs that are related to criminal behavior- criminogenic needs
Needs are dynamic risk factors e.g. pro-criminal attitudes
Have to be assessed through reliable and valid instrument

11. “Central Eight” (Andrews, 2006)
Risk Factor
Need
History of criminal behavior
Prosocial skills
Antisocial personality pattern
Problem solving skills, anger management
Antisocial cognition
Develop less risky thinking
Antisocial peers
Reduce/eliminate association with criminal peers –healthy peers
Family and/or marital discord
Reduce conflict, build positive relationships
Poor school and/or work performance
Strengthen academics and/or job
Few leisure or recreation activities
Prosocial outside involvement
Substance abuse
Reduce/eliminate use
Persons with Mental Illnesses have more of these risk factors than those without

12. Anti-Social Associates

13. History of Anti-Social Behavior

14. Risk-Need-Responsivity
Responsivity Principle- Assess the offender’s learning style and ability and provide treatment consistent with this style and ability
Two types: General and Specific
General: Use evidence-based treatment such as cognitive-behavioral methods
Specific: Vary treatment based on the offender’s strengths, level of motivation, and demographics. Includes counselor-offender matching
Assess through valid and reliable measures
Critical to RNR- dev. of therapeutic relationship + focus on strengths and desires of offender
Corrective emotional experience

15. X-ray of Male Brain

16. X-Ray of Female Brain

17. Technical Violators and RNR
Use reliable and valid measures to determine the technical violator’s current RNR-focus on current status including events surrounding current violation
Situational risk factors combine with historical risk factors plus lack of coping skills = violation. (e.g. Probationer with a substance abuse history is overwhelmed by a death in the family and reverts to drug use and criminal behavior.)

18. Graduated Sanctions
Burke (2007) described three types of State's responses to TVs:
Unstructured- Total discretion
Prescriptive- No officer discretion
Strategic- Structured Discretion

19. Graduated Sanctions and RNR
The term, graduated sanctions, often means that the State is attempting to move from a "black/white" approach to dealing with technical violators.
Graduated sanctions make sense in dealing with TPVs after an RNR assessment has been completed.
Sanctions should be based on the current RNR of the TPV.
Term, Graduated Sanctions, means structured and discretionary use of sanctions (Burke, 2007)

20. Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision (STICS)
Training Program initiated in Canada for Probation and Parole Officers by Bonta and others.
Adherence to RNR determined level of recidivism
Factors included adherence to discussing criminogenic needs that were found to be relevant through risk/needs assessment
Weak relationship (r = .22) for adults

21. Best Practices Techniques: Relationship Factors
Variables of PO or Counselor
Prompts/Encourages
Empathy
Warmth
Enthusiastic
Our fourth question:
Are POs using the techniques associated with best practices?
First, we have “establishing a relationship”
Except for “Prompts/Encouragement”, evident in about half of the cases
 Indicators of a positive rapport with clients

22. Best Practices Techniques: Structuring Skills in STICS
Variables of meeting
Prosocial reinforcement
Homework assigned
Practice
Procriminal discouragement
Prosocial modeling
Relatively good use of prosocial reinforcement but other techniques far less frequent
Indicators of behavioural influence were critical

23. Targeting Criminogenic Needs and Recidivism in STICS
Discussing criminogenic needs were related to reduced recidivism
More focus on criminogenic needs, lower the recidivism
Too much focus on conditions of supervision, increased recidivism
Importance of spending time on criminogenic needs
Some caution with the High category (N = 3)
To summarize…

24. NJ Parole Continuum for Dealing with TPVs
General Supervision
Electronic Monitoring
Day Reporting Centers
“Halfway Back” residential programs
Substance abuse
Work release
Regional Assessment Centers (RACs)
Parolee and TPV is placed on continuum based on RNR
Imp.- information sharing from agency to agency-seamless transfer of information
Increased to high risk probationers

25. NJ Regional Assessment Centers (RAC): RNR with High Risk TPVs
For male TPVs, who failed at one or more of the following supervision requirements:
Residential program failure
Absconds
Electronic monitoring failures
General supervision failures.
All RAC residents are under warrant status
Before RAC, these parolees would have gone to jail, had a revocation hearing at jail, and 80% or higher were returned to prison.

26. RAC Initiated in New Jersey as of July 2008
Was developed after a presentation by Parole Executive Director at a Governor's Commission on Corrections session
Two regional centers currently operating in NJ

27. RAC
14-28 day assessment of parolee's current risk/needs/responsivity factors
Parole officer on site
An attempt is made to resolve "open detainers"
Texas Christian University Drug Screen-II (TCUDS-II) Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R), PAI (Personality Assessment Inventory) are administered to all RAC residents
Biopsychosocial interview conducted.
Behavior in the facility is a part of the assessment

28. RAC Process
Assessment findings (current RNR) with treatment recommendations are sent to the hearing officers
Revocation hearing is held at RAC
Parole board is sent recommendation by hearing officer to either continue the resident on parole or return him to prison
Case of Mr. M., Mr. T., and Mr. B.

29. Case of Mr. M.
Male in early 30s with extensive psychiatric, criminal, and substance abuse history.
Absconded from residential centers b/c wanted to join military
Recently took self off psychiatric medication b/c he "felt great!"
At RAC hearing was r/c to residential center for offenders with psychiatric and substance abuse problems

30. Case of Mr. T.
Male in his mid 20s with an extensive criminal history and substance abuse problems.
Absconded from a residential program after arguing with and then allegedly being threatened by a gang leader.
When first arrived at RAC, asked to be sent back to prison as he stated that he would probably use drugs if given the opportunity.
Mr. T. was given a couple days to get acclimated to program. His options were then discussed with him, and he agreed to wait for hearing results.
Was recommended to a residential program with intensive substance abuse treatment.

31. Case of Mr. B.
Male in his mid-30s with a moderate criminal history (mostly nuisance offenses) and substance abuse problems.
Sent to RAC after being discharged from a residential program for reportedly not liking the accommodations at his placement.
Did not think he had a substance abuse problem.
Mr. B. was r/c to another residential program with substance abuse treatment. He refused placement and was returned to prison.

32. Ostermann Study of the RAC Continuation on Parole (COP) Group
Of those COP’ed (55-60%) from RAC:
11 (6.1%) came from an electronic monitoring caseload
66 (36.5%) came from a Community Programs (CP) treatment facility
64 (35.4%) came from a Day Treatment Program
23 (12.7%) came from general parole supervision
17 (9.4%) came from “intense supervision”

33. Ostermann Findings on (COP) Group
First assignment after RAC for COPs include:
22 (12.2%) were assigned to an electronic monitoring caseload
150 (82.9%) were assigned to a Community Program treatment facility
4 (2.2%) were assigned to parole on an out of state warrant
3 (1.7%) were assigned to regular supervision
2 (1.1%) maxed directly from RAC

34. Findings of RAC COP Group
For those COP’ed from RAC, outcomes have been:
36 (19.9%) were returned to prison on a technical parole violation
39 (21.5%) successfully completed parole (maxed supervision)
94 (51.9%) are still successfully engaged in parole
4 (2.2%) have a hold warrant out for them or enforced upon them
7 (3.9%) have a missing warrant out on them and are being actively pursued
1 (0.6%) died

35. COP Results
26.0% of those COP’ed from RAC eventually were returned to prison for a variety of reasons.
73.4% have either successfully completed parole or remain pro-socially engaged in the parole process.

36. RAC Cost Avoidance Figures
The RAC program saved New Jersey more than $2 million during fiscal year 2009
Expected to prevent $14 million in incarceration costs during Fiscal 2010
Recipient of the 2009 Council of State Governments Innovations Award

37. RAC Pilot Experience (RNR at the agency level)
Institutionsl system buy-in from the officers to the Director has been vital to the success of RAC
Meeting with probation boards and probation officers to educate them about the assessment process has been critical (needs and responsivity)
Orientation of new RAC residents has been critical(responsivity)
DOC "buy-in" has been critical to the process

38. John Jay College Study
Two groups (Halfway Back n=227 and Matched Comparison n=392 ) were followed months postrelease during
Significant differences in re-offending favoring the Halfway Back program persisted 12 to18 months postrelease.
Cost analyses found that Halfway Back saved NJ $1.3 million dollars in incarceration costs for every 100 technical violators.
Recently published in Criminal Justice Policy Review

39. Adaptive Programming
Placing people in the appropriate treatment categories requires a rigorous assessment of their risks and needs.
Offenders may be less than reliable sources of information.
Evaluators may not have access to a good database to assist with making the initial proper recommendations.
People’s lives change in unpredictable ways such that they make become more or less risky during the treatment timeframe.
Individual treatment plans have to adapt to their clients’ changing circumstances.
See Marlowe, Festinger, Dugosh, Benasutti, Fox, & Croft. Adaptive Programming Improves Outcomes in Drug Court: An Experimental Trial. Criminal Justice and Behavior (2012) Vol. 39 (4),

40. Adaptive Programming
Adaptive programming means that the supervision and treatment is adjusted based on the actual performance of the person in treatment.
For example, a person originally classified as low risk/low need may exhibit behaviors that suggest a need for more intense supervision and treatment.
One may determine that a person actually has symptoms of dependency and not just abuse or misuse. Punishing this individual for positive urines may not be the most effective method, rather increasing treatment services may make the most sense.
Programs benefit from developing adaptive algorithms

41. Adaptive Algorithms
Algorithms or decision trees are useful to determine a structure for adaptive programming. In a drug court example, one may use decision tree to determine frequency of court hearings (more frequent for high risk), determine whether a person is acting non-compliant (number of missed counseling sessions, failures to provide urine samples) or non-responsive to the current level of treatment ( number of positive drug urines).
Adaptive programming and the risk/needs matrix can be used in a variety of settings including drug court, intensive outpatient treatment, and residential treatment.

42. DSM-V for Substance Abuse Disorders
The DSM-V diagnosis for substance abuse disorders collapses the abuse and dependence diagnoses.
The legal problem criterion was removed.
11 symptoms representing a mixture of prior DSM criteria for abuse and dependence.
Severity specifiers using number of criteria met
Physiological dependence or not
Course specifiers are described e.g. in a controlled environment

43. DSM-V Implications
The differentiation between abuse and dependence have been eliminated; changing substance use to a dimensional rather than categorical diagnosis.
May make it more difficult to decide category of risk and treatment as abusers’ needs are different than people with substance dependence (addicts).

44. Guide for New Visitors Manuals Forms Conceptual Guides Publications
IBR HOME PAGE
A National Research Center for addiction treatment studies in community and correctional settings (over 600 free resource files available)
EVIDENCE
MANUALS FORMS EVIDENCE
ABOUT IBR-TCU STAFF PUBLICATIONS PRESENTATIONS PROJECTS NEWSLETTERS
OTHER LINKS WHAT’S NEW
SUMMARY
TCU Mapping- Enhanced Counseling
Treatment Process
Counseling Manuals
Corrections- Based
Treatment
National Evaluations
Organizational Readiness
Assessment Fact Sheets (with norms)
Guide for New Visitors
Manuals
Forms
Conceptual Guides
Publications
DATOS
Selected
brttns
© 2011

45. Conclusions
Technical violators have inundated the prison and jail system in many States
Assessment (RNR) and treatment (using RNR results) as an alternative to incarceration makes good sense from a public safety, humanistic and cost-avoidance standpoint.
Graduated sanctions and use of adaptive supervisions before TVs are sent to prison make sense.

46. Questions? Comments? For copies of slides contact: Ralph Fretz, Ph.D.
Director of Research and Assessment
Community Education Centers