Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders - An overview of States, Vera Institute, 2008
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
TREATMENT AND REENTRY PRACTICES FOR SEX OFFENDERS An Overview of States Reagan Daly Vera Institute of Justice September 2008 Suggested citation: Reagan Daly. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders: An Overview of States. New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2008. This report was prepared by the Vera Institute of Justice under grant 2006-MU-BX-K018 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Opinions expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice or the Vera Institute of Justice. © 2008 Vera Institute of Justice. All rights reserved. Additional copies can be obtained from the communications department of the Vera Institute of Justice, 233 Broadway, 12th floor, New York, New York, 10279, (212) 334-1300. An electronic version of this report is available for download on Vera’s web site, www.vera.org. Requests for additional information about the research described in this report should be directed to contactvera@vera.org. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice ii Executive Summary the ACUTE, are becoming more prevalent in community supervision. Over the past 15 years, the response of the criminal justice • No reentry initiatives were found that system to people who have been convicted of a sex offense specifically target sex offenders. Although has become increasingly punitive, relying heavily on eligible for general reentry programming in incarceration. Yet, a consequent increase in criminal most states, people convicted of a sexual justice costs has led some states to reconsider their offense have few, if any, options for reentry response to sex offenders. Concerns about public safety programming that addresses their unique needs. and the protection of victims remain the primary focus, but • Correctional institutions and community many states have also invested in treatment and reentry supervision agencies in most states share programs as alternatives to incarceration for some people. information about the case histories and treatment plans of sex offenders who are Although the content and structure of treatment and reentry programs vary considerably from one jurisdiction returning to the community from prison. to another, few if any resources provide criminal justice Research suggests that this type of inter-agency officials and policymakers an overview of these programs communication can help reduce recidivism. or a comparative assessment of their effectiveness. This • In general, community supervision agencies report attempts to address these issues by providing an manage risk and provide services. Research overview and analysis of existing treatment and reentry suggests that this is an effective approach to practices for sex offenders who are involved with the reducing recidivism. criminal justice system. It focuses, specifically, on four • A limited number of states are conducting broad areas of practice: treatment in prison, treatment research on their own treatment, reentry, and under community supervision, reentry programming, and supervision initiatives. Almost no studies have community supervision. Interviews with state officials and examined these programs from a cost-benefit treatment providers from 37 states that responded to our perspective. survey revealed several findings: • In both prison and community settings, the treatment of sex offenders is generally grounded in evidence-based practices, especially cognitive-behavioral therapy. In general, treatment is much more available in the community than in institutional settings. • In most of the participating states, communitybased treatment for sex offenders is supported, at least in part, by collecting fees from those in treatment—a circumstance that may limit access to these programs. • Standardized risk assessment tools such as the STATIC-99 are now widely used nationally in both prison- and community-based treatment programs. Needs assessment tools, especially Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice iii Acknowledgments I would like to thank the following people for their assistance in conducting this study: Robin Campbell, Ashley Cannon, Tina Chiu, Jennifer Fratello, Jordie Hannum, Alisa Klein, Abbi Leman, Scott Matson, Charles Onley, Ruth Parlin, Maggie Peck, Carla Roa, Christine Scott-Hayward, Neil Weiner, Dan Wilhelm, and finally, all interview respondents. Edited by Patrick Kelly. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice iv Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments......................................................................................................... iv Introduction and Background.......................................................................................... 1 Methodology ................................................................................................................. 2 Research on Treatment, Reentry, and Community Supervision Practices ............................ 3 Prison- and Community-Based Treatment ................................................................ 3 Reentry Programming ............................................................................................ 6 Community Supervision .......................................................................................... 7 Recent Trends in Treatment, Reentry, and Community Supervision Practices...................... 8 Prison-Based Treatment ......................................................................................... 8 Community-Based Treatment................................................................................ 11 Reentry Programming .......................................................................................... 12 Community Supervision ........................................................................................ 13 Conclusions................................................................................................................. 15 Bibliography ................................................................................................................ 16 Appendix A: State Overview Tables of Prison-Based Treatment ....................................... 18 Appendix B: State Overview Tables of Community-Based Treatment................................ 23 Appendix C: State Overview Tables of Reentry Programming .......................................... 26 Appendix D: State Overview Tables of Community Supervision Practices .......................... 28 Appendix E: Individual State Templates......................................................................... 30 Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice v Introduction and Background release information to the public about known convicted sex offenders, and has continued through the passage of The sentencing and management of sex offenders is one Jessica’s Law in 2006, which introduced stricter of the most difficult and controversial issues facing the penalties and restrictions for sex offenders.) Today, the criminal justice system today. This is in large part due to term sex offense can include everything from child the brutal nature of many sex crimes and the fact that molestation to public urination. The increasing reliance on incarceration as a many victims are children and other vulnerable people— a combination that elicits highly emotional responses response to sex offenses, together with expanded from the public. definitions of what constitutes a sex offense, has driven Over the past 15 years, the criminal justice system’s up criminal justice costs. This has led some states to response to people who have been convicted of a sex reconsider their response to sex offenders. While offense has become increasingly punitive. In 2004, more concerns of public safety and the protection of victims than 150,000 people were incarcerated in state prisons remain the primary focus, a number of states—especially for sex offenses, compared with 142,000 in 2002 and those with limited resources—have concluded that 1 110,000 in 1999. In many states, lengthy prison incarceration is simply not a viable long-term solution, at sentences are now the norm: according to one recent least not for all sex offenders. study, people who are incarcerated in connection with a In fact, most people who are convicted of a sex sex offense spend about twice as long in prison as those offense will be placed under community supervision at 2 who serve time for other crimes. Also, an increasing some point—either on probation immediately following number of local and state laws impose strict registration sentencing or on parole after having served a jail or and residency requirements on people who have been prison term. A 1997 study by the Bureau of Justice convicted of a sex offense, even after they have served a Statistics reports that of the approximately 234,000 adult prison sentence. There are now more than 636,000 sex offenders who are under the custody or control of registered sex offenders in the United States—one in 500 correctional agencies on any given day in the United 3 Americans. This number has doubled in the last 4 decade. The punitive response of the past 15 years is not limited to sentencing laws and stricter registration States, almost 60 percent are under some form of community supervision.5 Although there has been no follow-up study in recent years, this number has likely grown. requirements: the definition of what constitutes a sex To cope with the large number of sex offenders under offense has also been greatly expanded. (The beginning community supervision, a growing number of states are of this expansion coincided with the 1993 passage of investing in treatment programs. Increasingly, these Megan’s Law, a federal regulation that directed states to programs are also functioning as alternatives to incarceration. However, the content and structure of treatment and 1 W.J. Sabol, H. Couture, and P.M. Harrison, Prisoners in 2006 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006); P. M. Harrison and A. J. Beck, Prisoners in 2004 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004); A. J. Beck and P. M. Harrison, Prisoners in 2000 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000). 2 Lawrence A. Greenfield, Sex Offenses and Offenders: An Analysis of Data on Rape and Sexual Assault (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997, NCJ 163392). 3 National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, Registered Sex Offenders in the United States per 100,000 Population (map), March 25, 2008. 4 Devon B. Adams, Summary of State Sex Offender Registries (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics (Fact Sheet): March 2002, NCJ 192265). Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders reentry programs vary considerably from one jurisdiction to another, and there are few resources for criminal justice officials and policymakers who would like an overview of these programs nationwide. Both the Center for Sex Offender Management and the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, an international non-profit 5 Ibid. Vera Institute of Justice 1 organization, have produced publications on the treatment community supervision. We end with a discussion of and management of sex offenders, but policymakers overarching themes and conclusions. seeking to optimize their use of resources would profit from a survey of the programs that are currently in place across the United States. Similarly, their policy decisions Methodology would benefit from a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of current practices. Vera researchers relied on qualitative methods to collect This report attempts to address these issues by and analyze data for this report. Data was collected over providing an overview and analysis of existing treatment a six-month study period through phone interviews with and reentry practices for sex offenders involved with the state officials and other policymakers who manage sex criminal justice system (as opposed to those who are offenders. 6 civilly committed). Drawing on information that was For each of the four substantive areas mentioned collected by Vera researchers from policymakers and earlier (prison-based treatment, community-based treatment providers in the 50 states and Washington, DC, treatment, reentry, and community supervision), Vera it emphasizes the structure, content, and availability of researchers developed detailed interview questionnaires those programs and, when applicable, compares current and identified at least one potential respondent from each practices to research findings. Specifically, it focuses on state (for a minimum total of four contacts per state). four broad areas of practice: treatment in prison, Most respondents either worked in the Department of treatment under community supervision, reentry Corrections or another state agency or were treatment 7 programming, and community supervision. providers. Interview questions were open ended. The overall response rate for all four substantive Note that this report does not provide an exhaustive catalog of what each state is doing in terms of treatment, areas categories across all 51 jurisdictions was 65 reentry, and community supervision, nor does it provide percent.9 For each state, Vera researchers entered a comprehensive overview of the legal context in which information into an answer template that covered all four 8 these services are being delivered. Rather, it aims to substantive areas. Once this answer template was identify and analyze nationwide trends in treatment and completed, it was sent back to the respondents to reentry practices. confirm that it was consistent with the information they After a brief description of our methodology, we had provided. The completed state templates are begin with a review of the latest research on treatment, included as appendices in this report. They provide reentry, and community supervision practices for sex detailed information on both the treatment and reentry offenders. Then, we present and analyze our findings practices themselves as well as the context in which they from each of the four broad areas of practice, beginning were developed. To identify larger patterns, Vera researchers with prison-based treatment and followed by community-based treatment, reentry programming, and conducted a qualitative data analysis. This qualitative analysis consisted in reviewing each state template and 6 Civil commitment is the court-ordered confinement and treatment of sex offenders who are deemed to represent a significant threat to public safety. 7 Sex offenders in the community also receive treatment under civil commitment. However, this study focuses exclusively on treatment in the criminal justice context. 8 To gain a better understanding of state legislation governing sex offender definitions, registration requirements, and sentencing practices, the Vera Institute has also issued a companion report, The Pursuit of Safety: Sex Offender Policy in the United States, that gives a national overview of these issues. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders categorizing treatment and reentry practices according to topics of general interest, such as whether statewide standards exist or the number of treatment providers in a given state. These state overviews are also included in 9 In social science research, a response rate above 50 percent is considered adequate for analysis and publishing (see Babbie 2005 for more information). Vera Institute of Justice 2 the appendices. Categorizing treatment and reentry makes it difficult to assess the financial impact of these practices in this manner provided researchers with a programs. broad overview of the subjects. There are, however, a number of methodological This study has two methodological limitations. First, issues associated with research on sex offenders that as is true of any study that relies on interview responses, limit the applicability of these findings. For one, it is some of those we contacted chose not to participate, with often difficult to find a control group with which to the result that there are gaps in our data. Our discussion compare program participants—a necessary step if one is of national trends and patterns here reflects only those to know for certain a program’s effect. Also, low states that responded to requests for phone interviews. baseline rates of sexual offense arrests and significant Second, the trends identified in this report are based on under-reporting of sexual offenses make it difficult for information reported by state contacts. While Vera researchers to demonstrate statistically significant researchers made every effort to ensure that the reductions in sexual offending as a result of treatment information is accurate, this is a complex subject, and the and reentry programs.10 open-ended nature of our interview questions left room for interpretation and (possibly) error. In the remainder of this section, we discuss in more detail research as it relates to each of the four broad areas of practice identified earlier: treatment in prison, Research on Treatment, Reentry, and Community Supervision Practices community-based treatment, reentry programming, and community supervision. PRISON- AND COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT Treatment programs generally have three aims: First, they In this section, we present an overview of recent research aim to help offenders take responsibility for their actions. on treatment (both in prison and in the community), Second, they aim to prevent relapse. Third, they aim to reentry, and community supervision practices for sex rehabilitate people who have been convicted of a sex offenders. The aim is to provide a context for the offense.11 Different programs pursue these goals in a assessment of current state practices described in variety of ways, ranging from CBT to chemical castration subsequent sections of this report. (the use of a hormonal medication such as Depo-Provera to Broadly, the research on treatment methods has temporarily reduce testosterone levels) to education. The consistently found that cognitive-behavioral therapy appropriateness of any particular approach often depends (CBT), a treatment that relies on changing thought on the nature of a person’s offending behavior: a treatment processes to help people understand and accept that is geared toward pedophiles, for example, may not be responsibility for their offenses, is the most effective appropriate for an adult rapist who exhibits more general approach to reducing sexual and overall recidivism. criminal tendencies. (This result applies to programs that provide CBT in prison as well as those that provide it in other settings.) Treatment across settings. A 2002 meta-analysis of 43 In addition, the research on reentry and supervision studies on the psychological treatment of sex offenders practices has uncovered two salient findings: social found that the average rate of sexual recidivism for support is key to making a successful transition back to people in treatment (12.3 percent) was statistically society, and supervision is most effective when combined with specialized sex offender treatment services. Unfortunately, there has been little cost-benefit analysis of treatment and reentry programming, which Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 10 It becomes increasingly difficult to establish statistically significant differences as the number of outcome events decreases. 11 Kurt Bumby, Understanding Treatment for Adults and Juveniles Who Have Committed Sex Offenses (Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management, 2006). Vera Institute of Justice 3 significantly lower than for those who did not receive 12 differences in risk assessment scores between those who treatment (16.8 percent). The average rate of overall completed the program and those who did not, it is recidivism for those in treatment was also lower (27.9 impossible to know for certain whether factors other than percent, compared with 39.2 percent for people who treatment affected the observed outcomes.16 were not in treatment).13 Finally, the analysis found that In contrast, there are several studies which have CBT, which has become standard practice in almost examined specific treatment programs and concluded every state, is much more effective than the treatments that they do not have a significant effect on recidivism that were used before 1980. More recently, a review of rates.17 Among these is a study in which prisoners who 69 controlled outcome evaluations of sex offender had volunteered to participate in California’s Sex treatment confirmed many documented earlier findings. Offender Treatment and Evaluation Project (SOTEP) It also found that treatment reduces sexual recidivism by were randomly assigned to either SOTEP (which an average of 37 percent and that hormonal therapy and employed CBT and relapse prevention, a treatment that CBT work best—although it was difficult to separate the uses cognitive and behavioral techniques to help 14 effect of these treatments from other factors. The report offenders identify and change negative behavioral concluded that more rigorous studies were needed to patterns) or a control group.18 Likewise, researchers from determine the effectiveness of different treatments for the Washington State Institute for Public Policy different types of offenders. (WSIPP), which is well-known for both its metaanalyses and its research on treatment for sex offenders, Prison-based treatment. The research literature on the found that a sex offender treatment program for inmates effectiveness of treatment programs for incarcerated had little effect on recidivism rates for sexual and violent offenders is fairly inconclusive. A 2003 study of 195 sex offenses—despite the fact that those who participated in offenders who took part in a prison-based CBT program the program did so voluntarily and were thus likely to be in Vermont found that people who completed the amenable to treatment.19 program were significantly less likely (5.4 percent) than In spite of these inconclusive results regarding those who dropped out (30.6 percent) or refused to prison-based treatment in general, there is some evidence participate (30.0 percent) to be charged with a sexual that CBT in particular is effective for lowering 15 offense in a six-year follow-up period. It also found recidivism rates. In addition to the Vermont study that continuing with treatment after release from prison was significantly associated with lower recidivism of sexual offenses. However, this study did not use randomly assigned treatment or control groups, so despite the fact that researchers found no significant 12 Because meta-analyses incorporate numerous studies that measure recidivism differently, it is not possible to define recidivism more specifically. 13 R.K. Hanson, A. Gordon, A.J.R. Harris, J.K. Marques, W. Murphy, V.L. Quinsey, and M.C. Seto, “First Report of the Collaborative Outcome Data Project on the Effectiveness of Psychological Treatment for Sex Offenders,” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14 (2002): 169-194. 14 F. Lösel and M. Schmucker, “The Effectiveness of Treatment for Sexual Offenders: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Experimental Criminology 1(2005): 117-146. 15 R.J. McGrath, G. Cumming, J.A. Livingston, and S. Hoke, “Outcome of a Treatment Program for Adult Sex Offenders: From Prison to Community,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18, no 1 (2003): 3-17. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 16 The use of comparison groups allows researchers to assess whether or not changes in outcomes following treatment would have occurred in the absence of treatment as well. Random assignment to treatment or comparison groups provides the strongest evidence of a treatment effect because it creates two groups that are comparable except for the treatment intervention. 17 A. Mander, M. Atrops, A. Barnes, and R. Munafo, Sex Offender Treatment Program: Initial Recidivism Study (Anchorage, AK: Alaska Department of Corrections, 1996); and V.L.E. Quinsey, G.T. Harris, M.E. Rice, and C.A. Cormier, Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing Risk (Washington, DC: APA, 1998). 18 J.K. Marques, M. Wiederanders, D.M. Day, C. Nelson, and A. Van Ommeren, “Effects of a Relapse Prevention Program on Sexual Recidivism: Final Results from California’s Sex Offender Treatment and Evaluation Project (SOTEP). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 17 (2005): 79-107. Note that because random assignment fully controls for competing influences on recidivism, the absence of a significant difference between the two groups in this study can be interpreted as strong evidence that there was in fact no difference between them. 19 L. Song, and Roxanne Lieb, Washington State Sex Offenders: Overview of Recidivism Studies (Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 1995). Vera Institute of Justice 4 mentioned above, a 2000 study of high-risk sex $3,258 per participant. In contrast, treatment delivered to offenders who volunteered for Canada’s Clearwater Sex juveniles in an institutional setting saved an average of Offender Treatment Program, which used both CBT and $7,829 per participant.23 This was the only cost-benefit a relapse prevention component, found that program analysis we uncovered in our review. participants had significantly lower reconviction rates than those in a comparison group.20 Moreover, the Community-based treatment. The research on difference in conviction rates was much larger for sexual community-based treatment programs for sex offenders reconvictions than for nonsexual reconvictions. suggests, fairly consistently, that these programs are Similarly, in a comprehensive meta-analysis, WSIPP effective in reducing recidivism. In one study of 1,400 researchers found that prison-based CBT reduced sex offenders who were sentenced to probation in 21 recidivism by an average of 14.9 percent. Therapeutic community programs, which emphasize Minnesota, researchers found that re-arrest rates for sexual offenses for those who completed treatment (5 group support in facilitating behavior change, have also percent) were lower than for those who began but did not been shown to exert a beneficial effect on sex offender complete treatment (11 percent) and those who never recidivism. In 2003, the Colorado Division of Criminal entered treatment (11 percent).24 The Minnesota study Justice found that sex offenders who participated in their also found that offenders who completed treatment were prison-based therapeutic community program were less likely to be re-arrested for any new offense (13 significantly less likely than sex offenders who did not percent versus 45 percent for those who began but did participate in the program to recidivate across a number not complete treatment, and 42 percent for those who 22 of measures. Moreover, the Colorado study found that longer periods of treatment in the therapeutic community never entered treatment). In addition, there is evidence that treatment designed led to lower recidivism rates upon release. Again, to address deviant feelings and behaviors specifically though, this evaluation did not use randomly assigned related to sexual offending has an effect on both sexual treatment and control groups, nor did it match people in and nonsexual recidivism rates above and beyond the the two groups on the basis of characteristics that may effects of general treatment, which addresses more have influenced their decision to enroll in treatment. As general mental health and behavioral issues. For a result, it is not possible to attribute the observed example, a 1998 study found that probation supervision outcomes to the program with any certainty. combined with specialized sex offender treatment, as With regard to the cost of prison-based treatment compared with probation supervision combined with programs, a cost-benefit analysis by the WSIPP found only general mental health treatment, significantly that these programs, when combined with aftercare, reduced overall re-arrests (for both sexual and nonsexual actually increase costs to taxpayers by an average of offenses) among a group of sex offenders in rural Vermont.25 However, neither the Minnesota nor the 20 J. Looman, J. Abracen, and T. Nicholaichuk, “Recidivism among treated sexual offenders and matched controls,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 15, no. 3 (2000): 279-290; Polly Phipps, Kim Korinek, Steve Aos, and Roxanne Lieb, Research Findings on Adult Corrections Programs: A Review (Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 1999). Throughout this section, “significance” means statistical significance. 21 Steve Aos, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake, Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates (Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006). 22 Kerry Lowden, Nicole Hetz, Linda Harrison, Diane Patrick, Kim English, and Diane Pasini-Hill, Evaluation of Colorado’s Therapeutic Community for Sex Offenders: A Report of Findings (Office of Research and Statistics, Division of Criminal Justice, 2003). Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vermont study used random assignment, so it is not possible to conclude with any certainty that the 23 Aos, Miller, and Drake, Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates, 2006. 24 Sex Offender Supervision: 2000 Report to the Legislature (St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2000). 25 R.J. McGrath, S.E. Hoke, and J.E. Vojtisek, “Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Sex Offenders: A Treatment Comparison and LongTerm Follow-Up Study,” Criminal Justice and Behavior 25 (1998): 203-225. Vera Institute of Justice 5 reductions in re-arrests were due to treatment rather than studies that addresses the subject directly began by other factors. examining the general literature on successful reentry With regard to specific treatments, there is strategies for people convicted of a wide range of considerable evidence, grounded in methodologically offenses. Then, arguing that these reentry strategies can sound research, that community-based CBT is effective be applied to sex offenders so long as one takes the in reducing overall recidivism. However, it remains unique needs of sex offenders into account, it identified unclear whether community-based CBT is effective in several key factors in the successful reentry of sex reducing sexual recidivism. In a systematic meta- offenders: analysis of sex offender programming that examined only those evaluations that used a well-matched comparison group, WSIPP researchers found that CBT significantly reduces recidivism (by an average of 31.2 percent across studies) among low-risk sex offenders on 26 probation. The WSIPP study did not, however, examine the impact of CBT on sexual recidivism. It is difficult to assess the impact of medical treatments on sexual offending. This is primarily due to 1. Institutional and community case managers collaborate to maintain a consistent approach. 2. Manage sex offenders in prison in a way that prepares them for release. 3. Consider the benefits of discretionary release policies. 4. Have case managers actively involved in facilitating the transition. ethical restrictions that prevent researchers from 5. Recognize victims as important stakeholders. randomly assigning people to procedures or treatments 6. Develop a community supervision approach for that are either potentially harmful or invasive. sex offenders that promotes successful outcomes Nonetheless, there have been a handful of studies in this in addition to risk management.29 area. One of these, a study based on a sample of mostly pedophiles, found that people who volunteered for and The Center for Sex Offender Management endorsed were surgically castrated were significantly less likely to these strategies in a 2007 report. engage in recidivism of sexual offenses than volunteers 27 A handful of studies have examined the impact of who were not castrated. In addition, a meta-analysis specific reentry models on sex offenders leaving prison. found that hormonal therapy was, on average, more A 2005 study, for example, examined Circles of Support effective in reducing sexual recidivism than psychosocial and Accountability (COSA), a program that originated in interventions—although other aspects of these programs Canada and is becoming more prevalent in the United 28 may account for this effect. States. COSA encourages high-risk offenders to develop support networks in the community, consisting mostly of REENTRY PROGRAMMING volunteers from faith-based organizations who visit them Reentry programming aims to help sex offenders make on a regular basis, following their release from prison. the transition back into the community after they are The researchers found that sex offenders who released from prison. Although reentry in general is a participated in COSA recidivated at a rate that was 31.6 major topic in the field of corrections, there has been percent lower than people in a matched group who did relatively little research that focuses on the specific not participate.30 Another study of COSA, this one from needs of sex offenders leaving prison. One of the few 26 Steve Aos, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake, Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not (Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006). 27 Ibid. 28 Lösel and Schmucker, 2005. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 29 K.M. Bumby, T.B. Talbot, and M.M. Carter, “Sex Offender Reentry: Facilitating Public Safety through Successful Transition and Community Reintegration,” Criminal Justice and Behavior (in press). 30 R.J. Wilson and J.E. Picheca, “Circles of Support and Accountability: Engaging the Community in Sexual Offender Management” in B.K. Schwartz (Ed.), The Sex Offender: Issues in Assessment, Treatment, and Supervision of Adult and Juvenile Vera Institute of Justice 6 2007, concluded that the program led to a 70 percent ensure victim safety, and make reparation to reduction in re-arrests for sexual offenses and a 57 victims. 31 percent reduction in re-arrests for violent offenses. 2. Sex offender management should rely on interagency coordination, interdisciplinary Finally, a number of studies suggest that many sex offenders leaving prison need community support to find partnership, and job specialization to provide a a place to live, as strict residency requirements often unified approach. 32 3. Offenders should be held accountable through make it difficult for them to find affordable housing. individualized case management plans that use COMMUNITY SUPERVISION informal controls (which are learned and Community supervision refers to those forms of reinforced through treatment) as well as external correctional supervision that do not involve controls (in particular the active involvement of incarceration, such as probation, parole, and community family and law enforcement). Polygraphs should corrections. (Community corrections involves also be used to monitor these internal and monitoring offenders independently of probation and external controls. 4. State and local criminal justice agencies and parole. In general, community corrections agencies supervise offenders who have been diverted from prison policymakers should work together to develop but who represent a higher risk than people on informed public policies. 5. Criminal justice agencies should develop quality probation.) The research on community supervision is similar to that on reentry in that it stresses the control mechanisms to monitor the importance of social bonds and community support in implementation of these strategies and to assess reducing recidivism and rehabilitating offenders. their effectiveness over time. One of the most promising models of community supervision—and perhaps the most widely known in the Each of these principles is grounded in the clinical sex offender management community—is the treatment literature, and research on the containment containment model, an evidence-based model developed model provides support for its effectiveness in reducing by the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice in the recidivism. Some of this research overlaps with the 1980s. The containment model is grounded in five key treatment literature discussed earlier—for example, the principles, all of which support the notion that sexual re- Colorado therapeutic community program that was offending can be minimized through internal and found to reduce recidivism was grounded in the 33 external controls: containment approach. In addition, a 2001 Oregon study found that people on probation and parole who took part 1. The primary objectives of sex offender management are to enhance public safety, in a program that combined treatment, polygraph monitoring, and specialized supervision were 40 percent less likely to be convicted of a new felony than people on probation and parole in a neighboring county who did Populations (pp 13.1-13.21) (Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, 2005). 31 R.J. Wilson, J.E. Picheca, and M. Prinzo, “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Professionally Facilitated Volunteerism in the Community-Based Management of High-Risk Sexual Offenders: Part Two—A Comparison of Recidivism Rates, The Howard Journal, 46, no. 4 (2007): 327-337. 32 Joan Petersilia, When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry (New York, NY: New York Open Society Institute, 2003). 33 K. English, S. Pullen, and L. Jones, Managing Adult Sex Offenders in the Community: A Containment Approach (Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Research in Brief, 1997). Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders not receive the same combination of services.34 Other state-specific analyses have found that sex offenders who are supervised under the containment model have low 34 K.A. England, S. Olsen, T. Zakrajsek, P. Murray, and R. Ireson, “Cognitive/Behavioral Treatment for Sexual Offenders: An Examination of Recidivism,” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Treatment and Practice 13, no. 4 (2001): 223-231. Vera Institute of Justice 7 felony re-arrest rates (6 percent in one study). However, differences between the two groups with respect to the none of these state-specific studies used comparison number of people charged with sexual offenses; the groups, so it is difficult to attribute this outcome with number of people charged with sexual or violent 35 any certainty to the containment model. offenses; or the number of people charged with criminal offenses in general.39 Other research suggests that strong social support can play a crucial role in preventing recidivism. For example, a 2004 study of sex offenders sentenced to probation for child molestation found that people who had strong support from family and friends were less likely to have their probation status revoked for either a Recent Trends in Treatment, Reentry, and Community Supervision Practices technical violation or a new arrest and that people with strong support whose status was revoked generally lasted 36 This section summarizes recent trends in each of the four longer on probation than people without such support. substantive areas outlined earlier—prison-based The study also found that people who were employed treatment, community-based treatment, reentry, and 37 were less likely to violate the terms of probation. These community supervision—as revealed by our survey. findings are consistent with a body of research that When applicable, we assess these trends in light of highlights the shortcomings associated with a straight extant research. A detailed, state-by-state overview of risk management approach (that is, an approach that current practices for each substantive area can be found emphasizes monitoring offenders without attempting to in the appendices. address their needs). According to some studies, risk management strategies have a negligible impact on PRISON-BASED TREATMENT recidivism rates among the general offender population Our analysis of prison-based treatment indicates that when they are used in isolation; additional research while few states are able to provide treatment to all suggests that this is true of sex offenders as well.38 imprisoned sex offenders who are eligible, the treatment On a different note, a recent study in Vermont services that are currently in place are grounded in examined the impact of polygraph techniques on evidence-based approaches such as CBT and relapse recidivism rates among 208 adult male sex offenders prevention. There is less emphasis on drug therapy and who were both receiving treatment and under community polygraph monitoring, which have not yet been supervision. Half of the people in this sample group were adequately evaluated by researchers. Our qualitative subject to polygraph monitoring. Researchers found that analysis of survey data identified four trends: the limited although significantly fewer people in the group that was availability of prison-based treatment; the widespread subject to polygraph monitoring were charged with non- use of evidence-based treatment; the growing use of sexual violent offenses, there were no significant treatment standards; and the widespread use of risk (but not needs) assessments. 35 Division of Probation Services, Special Analysis (Denver, CO: State Court Administrators Office, Judicial Branch, 2007); M. Walsh, “Overview of the IPSO Program—Intensive Parole for Sex Offenders – in Framingham Massachusetts, Presentation by the parole board chair to the National Governors Association policy meeting on sexual offenders. November 15, 2005. San Francisco, CA. 36 This includes revocations for technical violations and new arrests. 37 John R. Hepburn, and Marie L. Griffin, “The Effect of Social Bonds on Successful Adjustment to Probation: An Event History Analysis,” Criminal Justice Review, 29, no. 1 (2004). 38 Kurt Bumy, Tom Talbot, and Madeline Carter, Managing the Challenges of Sex Offender Reentry (Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management, 2007). Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Limited availability. Prison-based treatment for sex offenders is available in most states. In general, though, the treatment capacity of prisons and jails is quite 39 R.J. McGrath, G.E. Cumming, S.E. Hoke, and M.O. Bonn-Miller, “Outcomes in a Community Sex Offender Treatment Program: A Comparison Between Polygraphed and Matched Non-polygraphed Offenders,” Sex Abuse 19 (2007): 381-393. Vera Institute of Justice 8 limited, especially when compared with community- Very few states employ drug therapy as part of based programs. Across the 37 states that responded to prison-based treatment on anything other than a case-by- our survey of prison-based treatment, we found that the case basis. Among those states that do administer drugs, percentage of imprisoned sex offenders in treatment at most use anti-depressants such as selective serotonin any given time ranged from 1 to 33 percent. Interviews reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as opposed to chemical with policymakers and treatment providers suggest that castration or other types of hormonal therapy—the types limited institutional capacity was the primary reason of drug therapy that are generally associated with these figures were so low. Only one state (Pennsylvania) medical treatment of sex offenders in the research reported that treatment is available in all facilities; in literature. Because very few studies have examined the contrast, 13 states reported that treatment was either role of anti-depressants in prison-based treatment for sex unavailable altogether or available in only one facility. offenders, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the Our findings also suggest that it is especially difficult for impact of current drug therapy practices. female sex offenders to access treatment. Fewer than half While polygraphs are more prevalent than drug of the participating states reported that treatment is therapy in the context of prison-based treatment, they are available in at least one women’s prison. (We did not, hardly widespread. Fewer than half of the states that however, directly ask about the availability of treatment responded to our survey reported using polygraphs in in women’s prisons, so the actual number may be some capacity in prison-based treatment programs. higher.) Unfortunately, as noted earlier, there is very little In light of the limited availability of prison-based research (as of spring 2008 we were unable to find a treatment programs, it is not surprising that very few single study) that examines the impact of polygraph states require all incarcerated sex offenders to undergo monitoring on sexual recidivism. treatment. Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, and New Jersey were A few states reported assigning people to different the only states that reported mandatory treatment in treatment programs based on their level of risk. This prison without any qualifiers. (In other words, all practice is consistent with criminological research, which incarcerated sex offenders in those states are presumably shows that, in the general population of offenders, those required to undergo treatment.) Other states provide who are higher risk achieve better outcomes when they treatment to select groups of sex offenders, or offer receive more intensive programming, and those who are education that does not technically qualify as treatment. lower risk do better in less intensive programming.41 Montana, for example, requires all people convicted of a Finally, a number of states have treatment programs sex offense to participate in a 15-week group educational that employ either multiple treatment components or a program with a sex therapist prior to being screened for progressive series of phases (or both). Most multi-phase further treatment; Ohio mandates treatment for all programs begin with an educational component. The medium- and high-risk sex offenders, as defined by content and purpose of this educational component 40 scores on the STATIC-99 risk instrument. varies from program to program: In Colorado and Montana, for example, the first phase of treatment Evidence-based treatment methods. Our survey involves providing an overview of the program so that indicates that most prison-based treatment programs rely participants know what to expect before they begin. In heavily on CBT, a treatment that, as noted earlier, is Ohio, on the other hand, the first phase consists of a supported by research. “psychoeducation” program that explains to participants 40 The STATIC-99 is an actuarial risk assessment instrument that predicts risk for sexual recidivism among adult males based on 10 factors that are stable over time. 41 D.A. Andrews and J. Bonta, The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. 3rd edition (Cincinnati, OH: Anderson, 2003). Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 9 the nature of their mental illness to help them prevent STATIC-99. In general, standardized instruments are relapse. more common than customized instruments, though it remains unclear to what extent such standardized Standards for treatment. Most states have standards instruments have been validated for the particular uses that define the parameters of treatment programming, individual states put them to. although only 15 of the 37 states that responded to our Only five states (Colorado, Illinois, Utah, Vermont, survey reported that their standards had been developed and Wisconsin) reported having developed customized by independent bodies outside of the department of risk assessment tools based on statistical data drawn corrections. The existence of treatment standards is from local sex offender populations.43 Two of the most significant because it creates a system of accountability widely recognized customized state tools are the among criminal justice agencies and providers and Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool (MnSOST-R) encourages them to use evidence-based techniques. and the Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender Risk Independent standards provide an additional level of (VASOR), both of which are being used in a number of oversight and, thus, encourage criminal justice agencies other states. and treatment providers to adopt responsible and Although the use of risk assessment tools is fairly effective approaches to treatment. Moreover, the fact that widespread, only a few states use actuarial needs independent standards are usually drafted by mental assessments in prison. (The two types of instruments health professionals and other authorities suggests that serve very different purposes in the context of prison- such standards are more likely to be effective than based treatment: risk assessments are primarily used to standards created by correctional officials. Among the predict the likelihood that a sex offender will recidivate; states with standards that were created by independent, needs assessments provide information about “dynamic” legislatively created bodies are Colorado, Connecticut, factors—such as alcoholism and negative moods—that 42 Kentucky, and Texas. Several other states—among change over time. Information about dynamic factors can them Washington, Vermont, and Montana—have then be used to craft individual treatment plans with standards that were created by independent bodies that targeted interventions that can be re-evaluated over were not legislatively created. time.) Only about one-quarter of states reported using a standardized needs assessment instrument in prison Risk and needs assessments. A great majority of settings; Vermont is the only state that has developed its participating states use at least one actuarial risk own needs assessment instrument.44 The Vermont assessment instrument for predicting sexual recidivism instrument is distinct from other needs assessment among people incarcerated for sex offenses. Such tools instruments in that it can be used not only to identify have the advantage of determining risk through statistical possible interventions, but also to assess progress in relationships, rather than through subjective clinical treatment. judgments. The most widely used risk assessment instrument is a standardized instrument known as the 42 Both Delaware and New Mexico recently passed legislation to create sex offender management boards (SOMB) for the purpose of drafting treatment standards. In addition, California and West Virginia are currently developing standards tied to legislative initiatives: California has a SOMB and recently created a treatment committee, which submitted a report to the state legislature in early 2008. In West Virginia, the Department of Health and Human Resources is developing standards to meet requirements of the 2006 Child Protective Act. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 43 Minnesota has one as well—the MnSOST-R—but did not participate in the study. 44 The MnSOST-R includes some dynamic factors, but in this report, needs assessment instruments have been defined as those that contain ACUTE dynamic factors. Among those that are commonly recognized are the ACUTE, Vermont Treatment Needs and Progress Scale, Multiphasic Sex Inventory (MSI), Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICS), Sex Offender Need Assessment Rating (SONAR), and COMPAS. Vera Institute of Justice 10 COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT programs than in prison-based programs. Thirty-two out In most states, the treatment that is provided for sex of 36 states that responded reported using polygraphs in offenders under community supervision is, like that some capacity for sex offenders on community which is available for incarcerated sex offenders, supervision. A few states reported using them for grounded in evidence-based approaches such as CBT. multiple purposes, including assessing the offender’s Most states also reported efforts to ensure that consistent ability to admit the full extent of his or her crime; treatment is available for people returning home from assessing the offender’s criminal history; obtaining prison. In general, sex offenders in the community have information about victims; and assessing the extent to greater access to treatment than those in prison, although which an offender is complying with treatment and in many states access to treatment is at least partially supervision requirements (the most common use). As paid for by offender fees. noted earlier, there is little evidence that polygraphs are There are many different community-based treatment programs for sex offenders. At the county effective in reducing recidivism rates, so it is unclear whether or not these practices should be expanded. level, where most probation is administered, there can be considerable variation in the content and structure of Consistency between prison-based and community- these programs. To simplify the process of gathering based treatment programs. In most states, correctional information on community-based treatment, we focused institutions and community supervision agencies share exclusively on programs at the state level, most of which information about the case histories and treatment plans target people on parole. of sex offenders who are returning to the community from prison. By communicating in this manner, these Evidence-based treatment. As was the case for prison- states aim to ensure that treatment is provided based treatment programs, almost all community-based consistently during the transition period—a goal that is treatment programs use CBT to some extent; many also consistent with the unified approach to sex offender use relapse prevention, arousal control (a technique for management emphasized in the containment model. The reducing deviant sexual urges), and victim empathy (a majority of states that took part in our survey reported technique that helps sex offenders become aware of the that even in cases where a person begins treatment in impact of their actions on victims.) Again, the prison but does not continue treatment under community prevalence of CBT is consistent with research that shows supervision, prison officials and community supervision this method is effective in reducing recidivism. officials communicate about the person’s prison-based Community-based treatment programs are also treatment. In Montana, for example, community similar to prison-based treatment programs in their treatment providers generally call prison case managers reluctance to use drug therapy on anything other than a to learn more about a person’s treatment while in prison, case-by-case basis. Although officials in about half of while in Colorado prison-based treatment providers send the states that responded to our survey reported that drug treatment records on to community-based providers as a therapy is sometimes used for sex offenders under part of the standard discharge procedure. community supervision, most also noted that it is not a standard component of treatment. A number of states Greater availability but limited state funding. Our reported using hormonal drug therapy in addition to data also suggest that treatment is more readily available chemical drug therapy—almost always only rarely or on under community supervision than in institutional a case-by-case basis. settings. This is to be expected, given the higher risk of On the other hand, the use of polygraph tests appears to be much more prevalent in community-based Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders recidivism among offenders who re-integrate into society. All of the states that participated in our Vera Institute of Justice 11 community treatment interview reported that treatment is limited. Although sex offenders in most states are available in some capacity for sex offenders under eligible for general reentry programs, only about a third community supervision; about two-thirds described the of participating states reported that they have reentry distribution of treatment providers as “statewide.” programming that targets the specific needs of this The number of treatment providers varied greatly population. In addition, the role of faith-based from one state to another, ranging from three (in both organizations in providing reentry programs for sex Arkansas and Washington, DC) to 427 (in Texas). There offenders is not especially prominent. On the other hand, was also a great deal of variation in treatment settings. case managers—people assigned to help sex offenders Most states contract with private providers in some plan and carry out reentry plans—are becoming more capacity; some states contract with a single provider, common in prisons. others work with an assortment of different providers. An example of the former is Connecticut, which Lack of sex-offender specific initiatives. Especially contracts with the Connection Inc.’s Center for the striking was the finding that many states do not have Treatment of Problem Sexual Behavior (CTPSB) to reentry initiatives for sex offenders.45 Most states provide all treatment to people on probation and parole. reported that they provide at least some services for (CTPSB employs a staff of 30). Examples of the latter offenders (including sex offenders) during reentry, but include Washington and Ohio. In Washington, treatment only around half reported having specific reentry is provided by both the Department of Corrections and initiatives to coordinate the delivery of those services. private contractors. In Ohio, there are two types of None reported having a reentry initiative specifically for residential programming for sex offenders in the sex offenders. Both Colorado and Ohio reported that community: halfway houses that provide sex offender- they use the COSA model (discussed earlier in the specific programming (in addition to other types of section on reentry programming), but because COSA programming) for offenders on probation and parole, and focuses on post-release support, it is not, technically community-based correctional facilities, which provide speaking, a reentry initiative. Finally, we found that in diversionary programs for low-risk sex offenders on most states that provide services to sex offenders at some probation. point during reentry, those services are available in all For many community-based treatment programs, prisons throughout the state. funding appears to be a significant concern. Most states reported that at least some funding comes directly from Case managers in prison and community settings. offenders; around one-quarter of states reported that Our review also indicates that case managers—people offender fees are the only source of funding for assigned to help sex offenders plan and carry out community-based treatment. In these states, access to individual reentry plans—are almost as widely available community-based treatment is at least partially in prisons as they are in the community. This is a very dependent on the sex offender’s ability to pay for it. positive development; as mentioned earlier, collaboration between institutional and community case REENTRY PROGRAMMING managers has been identified as one of the key Given that most sex offenders who are sentenced to components of successful reentry. About half of the prison are eventually released into the community, states we interviewed reported that some sort of case reentry programming has recently become a topic of significant interest in the field of sex offender management. Yet, our review has revealed that reentry programming for sex offenders in the United States is Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 45 For the purposes of this report, a reentry initiative is distinct from reentry programming in that it represents a comprehensive effort to provide well-coordinated services to people who are making the transition home from prison. In general, reentry initiatives regulate the provision of services both before and after release. Vera Institute of Justice 12 manager is assigned to offenders while they are still in Washington reported that at least half of all nonprofit prison. Our survey also indicates that this practice is not reentry service providers are faith-based, and in limited to states with a particular reentry initiative in Michigan, faith-based organizations play a role in the place. Montana, for example, does not have a reentry development of reentry policy through county-level initiative; nonetheless, probation officers begin working reentry steering committees. In Delaware, nonprofit with offenders to prepare them for reentry about 90 days organizations generally do not provide services to sex prior to release. In many states, the role of post-release offenders; however, the few that do are faith-based. case manager is filled by probation and/or parole officers, although some states (such as Pennsylvania and COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Utah) employ specialized case managers for that The last of the four substantive areas on which we purpose.46 In Washington State, some service providers surveyed policymakers and treatment providers was the begin working with offenders six to twelve months supervision of sex offenders in the community. As in before release and continue working with them in the previous sections, our discussion here is limited to community. supervision at the state level. In some states, that means both probation and parole. In other states (such as Role of faith-based organizations. Our data suggest Kansas), it also means community corrections agencies that in most jurisdictions, faith-based organizations do separate from probation and parole. In still other states, not play a central role in the provision of post-release where probation is administered at the county-level, it reentry services for the general population of offenders. means parole alone. And in a few states (Pennsylvania is While a number of states have adopted the COSA model, an example), probation and parole are administered at which, as discussed earlier, makes extensive use of both the state and county level. In order to simplify our volunteers from faith-based organizations to support and discussion, we do not distinguish here between parole- monitor sex offenders returning to the community, very based practices and probation-based practices on the few states cited COSA as a reentry initiative. Indeed, the state level. For more information on these issues, please role of faith-based organizations in reentry appears refer to the individual state appendices. difficult to measure. Most interview respondents could Our review indicates that needs assessments are only estimate the involvement of faith-based increasingly being administered to sex offenders under organizations in very general terms (e.g., some, limited), community supervision. In addition, we found that in and Vera researchers were unable to obtain precise data most states, community supervision agencies pursue two about the proportion of service providers that are faith- goals: managing risk and providing services. Research based. That said, respondents from a few states did suggests that this is an effective approach to reducing report that faith-based organizations either play or are recidivism. expected to begin to play a significant role in the provision of reentry services. In Ohio, for example, a law Increasing use of needs assessments. There is a (HB 113) was recently passed that requires the growing use of needs assessment instruments for sex Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections to work offenders under community supervision. One prominent with faith-based organizations to develop prison-based example is the ACUTE, which was adapted from the Sex mentorship reentry programs. Respondents from Offender Need Assessment Rating (another needs assessment tool) and includes seven scales of acute 46 In both Pennsylvania and Utah, sex offenders are assigned to a “transitional coordinator,” a parole agent charged with helping the newly released person re-integrate into the community immediately upon release from state prison. After 90 days, the person’s case is then transferred to a general parole agent. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 13 dynamic factors, which change rapidly.47 As mentioned sex offenders under community supervision. Specialized earlier, the use of such tools is a positive development, provisions are supervision conditions—such as as they can track changes in dynamic risk factors over restrictions on an offender’s contact with minors—that time and modify supervision practices according to apply specifically to sex offenders. In general, they aim changes in risk levels. More than half of the states that to enhance community supervision and reduce exposure responded to our survey reported that they use actuarial to cues that are likely to trigger deviant behavior. In needs assessment tools to manage sex offenders under many states, specialized provisions are reserved for community supervision—a figure that is much higher specialized caseloads that include only sex offenders.50 than the proportion of states that use these tools in prison (Probation and parole officers who administer these 48 settings. As previously mentioned, Vermont has caseloads have generally undergone specialized developed a customized instrument that assesses both training.) In addition, more than half of the states that reported needs and treatment progress, and this instrument has recently been adopted in West Virginia as well. In addition to needs assessments, almost all of the back have lifetime supervision (mandatory supervision for the rest of a person’s life). In most cases, this states we surveyed administer at least one type of sanction is only used for high-risk or violent sex actuarial risk assessment to sex offenders under offenders: In Iowa, for example, only people who are community supervision. The STATIC-99 is the most convicted of a Class C felony sex offense or higher are prevalent risk assessment tool: 24 out of the 29 states we eligible for lifetime supervision. Our review does not indicate that specialized interviewed reported using it in some capacity. Only three states reported having developed customized risk provisions, specialized caseloads, and lifetime assessment tools for sex offenders under community supervision have displaced efforts to provide services, supervision, although customized tools are used more however. As noted earlier, most of the states that frequently in the community than in prison. The responded to our survey reported that treatment has customized risk assessment tools that were developed in become an important part of community supervision. Colorado and Vermont, as discussed earlier, are This finding is consistent with research showing that administered both in prison and to those under community supervision that combines surveillance and community supervision. Additionally, the Iowa intensive supervision with treatment and rehabilitation Department of Corrections is in the process of services is more effective at reducing recidivism than developing a customized tool called the ISORA 8 for sex surveillance alone, both among the general offending 49 offenders on both probation and parole. population and among sex offenders.51 50 Focus on treatment and monitoring. Our review also revealed that most states have specialized provisions for 47 ACUTE dynamic factors are distinct from stable dynamic factors, which change over longer periods of time. 48 Again, needs assessment instruments are defined as those that contain ACUTE dynamic factors. These include the ACUTE, Vermont Treatment Needs and Progress Scale, Multiphasic Sex Inventory (MSI), Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICS), Sex Offender Need Assessment Rating (SONAR), and COMPAS. 49 Alabama; Kansas; Montana; Washington, DC; and Wyoming also reported having customized risk assessment tools under community supervision, but they described them as general risk assessment instruments, rather than sex offender-specific. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Some states do not have specialized caseloads for all sex offenders under community supervision, but this is usually because not all jurisdictions have enough sex offenders to warrant specialized caseloads. Additionally, some states require only those sex offenders who meet certain risk or offense criteria to be supervised on specialized caseloads. For example, in Indiana, if an offender on parole is originally convicted of or has a history of at least one of a specific subset of offenses, including, rape, criminal deviant conduct, molestation, or failure to register, he or she is required to be supervised under the Sex Offender Management and Monitoring Program. 51 S. Aos, P. Phipps, R. Barnoski, and R. Lieb, Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not. Document number 06-01-1201. (Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006); R.J. McGrath, G.F. Cumming, J.A. Livingston, and S.E. Hoke, “Outcome of a Treatment Program for Adult Sex Offenders: From Prison to Community,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18 (2003): 3-17. Vera Institute of Justice 14 Conclusions Research suggests that this type of inter-agency communication can help reduce recidivism. Our findings can be summarized as follows: • • both manage risk and provide services. Research In both institutional (prison-based) and suggests that this is an effective approach to community settings, the treatment of sex offenders is generally grounded in evidencebased practices, especially cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). In general, treatment is much more available in the community than in institutional settings. • In a majority of participating states, community- In general, community supervision agencies reducing recidivism. • A limited number of states are conducting research on their own treatment, reentry, and supervision initiatives. There have been almost no studies that examine these programs from a cost-benefit perspective. based treatment for sex offenders is supported, at least in part, by collecting fees from those in treatment—a circumstance that may limit access to these programs. • Standardized risk assessment tools such as the STATIC-99 are now widely used in both prisonbased and community-based treatment programs across the nation. However, a lack of data prevented us from determining the number of states that have validated these tools for their local populations. • Needs assessment tools, especially the ACUTE, are becoming more prevalent in community supervision. • We found no reentry initiatives that specifically target sex offenders. Although sex offenders in most states are eligible for general reentry programming, there are few reentry programs that address the unique needs of this population. One exception is Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA), a program that encourages high-risk offenders to develop The variety in treatment and reentry practices across different states (and even from one jurisdiction to another) makes it impractical to devise blanket recommendations from these findings. However, the need for more rigorous research on treatment and reentry practices for sex offenders is clear. Although the current body of research indicates that cognitive-behavioral therapy and the containment model of supervision are both effective in reducing recidivism, many questions remain unanswered: Many of the practices described in this report, for example, consist of multiple components, but it is unclear how each of the individual components affects recidivism or improves offender outcomes such as reintegration. Furthermore, there is very little research that provides a clear picture of what works for whom. Finally, it bears repeating that there is a noticeable lack of research on the cost-savings associated with treatment and reentry programs. Finding answers to these questions will help policymakers create more informed and more effective policies for the treatment and management of sex offenders. support networks in the community. COSA has been piloted in several states. • In most states, correctional institutions and community supervision agencies share information about the case histories and treatment plans of sex offenders who are returning to the community from prison. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 15 Bibliography Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Research in Brief, 1997. Adams, Devon B. Summary of State Sex Offender Registries. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics (Fact Sheet): March 2002, NCJ 192265. Greenfield, Lawrence A. Sex Offenses and Offenders: An Analysis of Data on Rape and Sexual Assault. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997, NCJ 163392. Andrews, D.A., and J. Bonta. The Psychology of Criminal Conduct. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson, 2003. Aos, Steve, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake. Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006. Aos, Steve, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake. Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006. Babbie, Earl R. The Practice of Social Research (11th Edition). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth, 2005. Beck, A.J., and P.M. Harrison. Prisoners in 2000. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000. Bumby, Kurt. Understanding Treatment for Adults and Juveniles Who Have Committed Sex Offenses. Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management, Hanson, R.K., A. Gordon, A.J.R. Harris, J.K. Marques, W. Murphy, V.L. Quinsey, and M.C. Seto. “First Report of the Collaborative Outcome Data Project on the Effectiveness of Psychological Treatment for Sex Offenders.” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14 (2002): 169-194. Harrison, P.M., and A.J. Beck. Prisoners in 2004. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004. Hepburn, John R., and Marie L. Griffin. “The Effect of Social Bonds on Successful Adjustment to Probation: An Event History Analysis.” Criminal Justice Review, 29, no. 1 (2004). Looman, J., J. Abracen, and T. Nicholaichuk, “Recidivism Among Treated Sexual Offenders and Matched Controls.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 15, no. 3 (2000): 279-290. Lösel, F., and M. Schmucker. “The Effectiveness of Treatment for Sexual Offenders: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 1(2005): 117-146. 2006. Bumby, Kurt, Tom Talbot, and Madeline Carter. Managing the Challenges of Sex Offender Reentry. Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management, 2007. Bumby, K.M., T.B. Talbot, and M.M. Carter. “Sex Offender Reentry: Facilitating Public Safety through Successful Transition and Community Reintegration.” Criminal Justice and Behavior (in press). Division of Probation Services. Special Analysis. Denver, CO: State Court Administrators Office, Judicial Branch, 2007. England, K.A., S. Olsen, T. Zakrajsek, P. Murray, and R. Ireson. “Cognitive/Behavioral Treatment for Sexual Offenders: An Examination of Recidivism.” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Treatment and Practice 13, no. 4 (2001): 223-231. English, K., S. Pullen, and L. Jones. Managing Adult Sex Offenders in the Community: A Containment Approach. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Lowden, Kerry, Nicole Hetz, Linda Harrison, Diane Patrick, Kim English, and Diane Pasini-Hill. Evaluation of Colorado’s Therapeutic Community for Sex Offenders: A Report of Findings. Denver, CO: Office of Research and Statistics, Division of Criminal Justice, 2003. Mander, A., M. Atrops, A. Barnes, and R. Munafo. Sex Offender Treatment Program: Initial Recidivism Study. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Department of Corrections, 1996. Marques, J.K., M. Wiederanders, D.M. Day, C. Nelson, and A. Van Ommeren. “Effects of a Relapse Prevention Program on Sexual Recidivism: Final Results from California’s Sex Offender Treatment and Evaluation Project (SOTEP).” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 17 (2005): 79-107. McGrath, R.J., G.E. Cumming, S.E. Hoke, and M.O. Bonn-Miller. “Outcomes in a Community Sex Offender Treatment Program: A Comparison Between Vera Institute of Justice 16 Polygraphed and Matched Non-polygraphed Offenders.” Sex Abuse 19 (2007): 381-393. McGrath, R.J., G. Cumming, J.A. Livingston, and S. Hoke. “Outcome of a Treatment Program for Adult Sex Offenders: From Prison to Community.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18, no. 1 (2003): 3-17. Wilson, R.J., J.E. Picheca, and M. Prinzo. “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Professionally Facilitated Volunteerism in the Community-Based Management of High-Risk Sexual Offenders: Part Two—A Comparison of Recidivism Rates.” The Howard Journal, 46, no. 4 (2007): 327-337. McGrath, R.J., S.E. Hoke, and J.E. Vojtisek, “CognitiveBehavioral Treatment of Sex Offenders: A Treatment Comparison and Long-Term Follow-Up Study.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 25 (1998): 203-225. National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, Registered Sex Offenders in the United States per 100,000 Population (map), March 25, 2008. Petersilia, Joan. When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry. New York, NY: New York Open Society Institute, 2003. Phipps, Polly, Kim Korinek, Steve Aos, and Roxanne Lieb. Research Findings on Adult Corrections Programs: A Review. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 1999. Quinsey, V.L.E., G.T. Harris, M.E. Rice, and C.A. Cormier. Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing Risk. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1998. Sabol, W.J., H. Couture, and P.M. Harrison. Prisoners in 2006. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006. Sex Offender Supervision: 2000 Report to the Legislature. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2000. Song, L., and Roxanne Lieb. Washington State Sex Offenders: Overview of Recidivism Studies. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 1995. Walsh, M. “Overview of the IPSO Program—Intensive Parole for Sex Offenders–in Framingham Massachusetts, Presentation by the parole board chair to the National Governor’s Association policy meeting on sexual offenders. November 15, 2005. San Francisco, CA. Wilson, R.J., and J.E. Picheca. “Circles of Support and Accountability: Engaging the Community in Sexual Offender Management” in B.K. Schwartz (Ed.), The Sex Offender: Issues in Assessment, Treatment, and Supervision of Adult and Juvenile Populations. (pp 13.113.21) Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, 2005. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 17 Appendix A: State Overview Tables of Prison-Based Treatment52 Table 1: Availability of Prison-Based Treatment, by State State # of prisons with treatment 0 3 Not available Program in female prison? 9 Not available California 0 - - Colorado 5 9 9 Connecticut 5 9 9 Delaware 1 Florida Georgia Idaho 0 0 3 Illinois 7 Indiana 3 9 Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maine 2 4 5 1 9 9 Missouri 3 9 Montana 1 9 New Hampshire 2 737 15% New Jersey 1 685 Not available New Mexico 3 North Carolina 1 Ohio 7 Oklahoma 4 9 Oregon 0 - Alaska Arizona Arkansas Pennsylvania All 26 Rhode Island Not available South Carolina South Dakota Texas54 State treatment standard (aside from DOC) - 5,216 Not available Over 23,000 Not available Not available Not available Not available 1% 1,346 9 6,800 3% 9 4,000 9 1,396 2,700 2,178 357 Not available 9 9 580 4,743 9,800 3,500 9 9 9 9 7% - 670 9 % of sex offenders in treatment 8.6% Not available 8% 661 1 4 3 # of sex offenders in prison 9 9 53 6,000 28% 30% 11% 20% 16% Not available Not available 16% 1.1% 5% 3% 20% 400 Not available 2,800 1.7% 804 26,121 13% 2% 52 The findings presented in all overview tables represent general characteristics of state practices but do not provide specific details about qualifying factors or circumstances. Please refer to individual state answer templates for more detailed information about each of the states. 53 The DOC standard applies to programming for treatment in general, but Pennsylvania also has a separate set of standards governing treatment for sexually violent predators (SVP). These standards were developed by the Sex Offender Assessment Board (SOAB). Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 18 54 State # of prisons with treatment Program in female prison? Utah 1 Vermont 3 Virginia 16 Washington 2 9 West Virginia 8 9 Wisconsin Wyoming 8 1 9 State treatment standard (aside from DOC) # of sex offenders in prison 9 1,860 9 426 9 3,500 3,187 5,869 9 4,586 355 % of sex offenders in treatment Not available 20% 5% 6.5% Not available 12% 33% Responses for New Jersey and Texas reflect only intensive treatment. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 19 Table 2: In-Prison Treatment Components, by State55 State Duration CBT Alaska 12-24 months 12 months 20-24 months 12 months Not available 26 weeks -8 months 24 months56 2 months 14-16 months 14.8 months 24 months 48 months 9-12 months 15 to 30 months 6 months minimum Varies 18 months - Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maine Missouri Montana New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota 9 Relapse prevention - Arousal control - Victim empathy - Psychoeducation - Drug therapy - Truth test - 9 9 9 - - - - - - - 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 - - 9 9 9 - - - - 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available 9 9 9 Not available - Not available 9 9 Not available 9 Not available Not available Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 5 months 9 9 9 9 15-22 months 12-16 months 9 -27 months Varies 20 months 12 months 9 9 9 9 9 9 - - - - 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 - - - 9 9 55 Table 2 lists only selected treatment components. Components were checked off if a state reported its use to some extent (however minimal). For more detail on content of programming and the frequency at which specific components are employed, please refer to individual state answer templates. 56 This figure is only for two of the treatment program. For the other programs, the duration of treatment varies. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 20 State Duration Texas57 18 months 12-18 months 6-36 months 2-3 years 13 months Varies 6 months - 2 years 24 months Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming 57 CBT Relapse prevention 9 Arousal control 9 Victim empathy Drug therapy Truth test 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Psychoeducation 9 9 9 9 9 9 Responses for Texas reflect only intensive treatment. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 21 Table 3: Assessment Tools Administered in Prison, by State58 State Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa59 Kansas Kentucky Maine Missouri Montana New Hampshire New Mexico North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Dakota Texas60 Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming STATIC-99 9 9 9 9 9 RRASOR SONAR LSI-R 9 MnSOST-R VASOR 9 Needs assessment 9 9 Customized tool 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 - - - 9 9 9 9 9 9 - - 9 9 9 9 - 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 58 Table 3 includes only selected risk assessment tools. Because only a limited number of states employ actuarial needs assessment tools, they were not listed separately. For more information on the use of risk and needs assessment tools, please refer to the individual state answer templates. 59 Assessment tools are used but do not currently drive treatment decisions 60 Responses for Texas reflect only intensive treatment. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 22 Appendix B: State Overview Tables of Community-Based Treatment Table 4: Availability and Funding of Community-Based Treatment, by State State Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware DC Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maine Maryland Michigan Missouri Montana New Hampshire New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania69 South Carolina South Dakota Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington70 West Virginia Wyoming # of providers61 18 3 Not available 179 1664 Not available 3 60 34 12 40065 45-50 15-2066 13 1467 20 50 65 56 15 Statewide distribution62 9 * Not available Not available Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 * Not available 9 * 9 * 9 9 9 * 9 68 60 10 6 Not available Not available 25 Not available 9 9 Not available Not available 7 427 Several dozen to 100 or so 50 26 871 772 15 9 9 9 9 9 State funding 9 9 9 9 9 Offender funding 9 9 9 9 Other funding63 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available 9 9 Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 61 If a state contracts with one provider for all treatment services, the number in this column represents the number of office locations statewide (unless otherwise noted). 62 States that reported statewide availability but limited or no availability in rural areas were classified as having a statewide distribution. These states are marked with an *. States that reported localized availability are left blank. 63 This includes federal, grant, insurance, and provider funding. 64 This number includes only state-contracted providers. 65 Two of these providers are state-sponsored, the rest are private providers. 66 This estimate does not include DOC providers. 67 This number only includes state-sponsored providers, not private treatment providers. 68 This estimate includes juvenile providers. 69 Information reflects only practices and characteristics of Sex Offender Assessment Board Programs for sexually violent predators. 70 For Washington, information reflects only DOC practices, not those of private providers. 71 This number includes only DOC providers. Washington also has numerous private providers. 72 This number includes only DOC providers. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 23 Table 5: Community-Based Treatment Components, by State73 State Duration CBT Relapse prevention Arousal control Psychoeducation Truth test 9 Arkansas 24 months 9 California 18 months 9 9 9 9 9 30-48 months 36 months Varies 18-24 months 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Florida 30 months 9 9 9 9 9 9 Georgia Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 30 months + aftercare 24 months Entire supervision Entire supervision 36 months 24 months Up to lifetime 12-24 months 12 months minimum 36-48 months 8-48 months 9 Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maine Maryland Michigan Missouri Montana New Hampshire 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 No prison treatment No prison treatment Varies 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Varies 9 9 9 No prison treatment 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available 9 Continuity74 No prison treatment 24 months Idaho 9 Drugs therapy Alaska Colorado Connecticut Delaware DC 9 Victim empathy 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 73 Table 5 lists only selected treatment components. Components were checked off if a state reported its use to some extent (however minimal). For more detail on content of programming and the frequency at which specific components are employed, please refer to individual state answer templates. 74 States were coded as having continuity if they reported that programming in the community followed from prison-based programming or that there is an exchange of information between institutional and community agents. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 24 State Duration New Mexico Not available 24 months minimum 9 months maximum North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania76 South Dakota Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington77 West Virginia Wyoming 75 76 77 CBT 9 Relapse prevention 9 9 Arousal control 9 9 Victim empathy 9 9 Psychoeducation Drugs therapy 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Most parolees in North Dakota do not receive treatment in prison. Those that do are recommended to continue with treatment on parole. Information reflects only practices and characteristics of Sex Offender Assessment Board Programs for sexually violent predators. For Washington, information reflects only DOC practices, not those of private providers. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 9 9 Vera Institute of Justice 25 Continuity74 9 9 9 60 months 18 months 36 months Varies 18-36 months 24 months + 12 months aftercare 24 months 23 months 24 months Not available Truth test No prison treatment75 9 No prison treatment 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Appendix C: State Overview Table of Reentry Programming Table 6: Availability of Reentry Services, by State State Alaska Arkansas78 California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Iowa Kansas Massachusetts Michigan Missouri Montana New Hampshire New Mexico Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania79 Rhode Island South Dakota Texas Utah Vermont Virginia 78 79 Pre-release services - Post-release services - # of prisons 0 Specialized sex offender programming - Specific state initiative - Pre-release case managers - Post-release case managers - 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 All All Not available All All All 4 of 9 All All 14 out of 48 11 of 20 All All All All All Not available Not available Not available All All All All 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available Arkansas is in the process of creating a risk/needs assessment specifically for sex offenders—the instrument is in draft form and is not yet validated. Responses reflect only post-release services. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 26 9 Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Not available 9 9 9 9 State Washington West Virginia Wyoming Pre-release services 9 9 9 Post-release services 9 # of prisons 9 Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders All All All Specialized sex offender programming 9 Specific state initiative 9 9 Vera Institute of Justice 27 Pre-release case managers 9 9 9 Post-release case managers 9 9 9 Appendix D: State Overview Tables of Community Supervision Practices Table 7: Assessment Instruments Administered on Community Supervision, by State State Alabama Alaska Arizona California Colorado Connecticut Delaware DC Georgia Idaho Iowa Kansas Maryland Michigan Missouri Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania South Dakota Texas80 Utah Vermont Virginia81 Washington West Virginia Wyoming 80 81 STATIC-99 RRASOR SONAR LSI-R 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 MnSOSTR VASOR Needs assessment 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Customized tool 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Responses for Texas reflect only intensive treatment. STATIC-99 is used only in related to civil commitment Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders 9 Vera Institute of Justice 28 Table 8: Specialized Supervision Options for Sex Offenders in the Community, by State82 State Lifetime supervision option Specialized caseloads Alabama 9 Alaska 9 9 Arkansas 9 9 California 9 Colorado Connecticut Caseload size Not available 58 Not available 20-70 9 20-40 Varies 25 25 20 160 maximum83 Varies 2-5 years 5-15 years Not available 45-64 months 1-3 years 10 years maximum 2 years – Life 2 years 2 years Varies 9 9 9 Georgia 9 9 Idaho 9 9 40-75 Illinois 9 9 20 Indiana 9 9 46 Iowa 9 9 15-30 Kansas Maryland Michigan 9 9 9 9 35 57 35+ 45 maximum 40 22 47 maximum 50-55 Below 60 50-60 Not available Missouri 9 9 Montana New Mexico 9 9 9 9 9 North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania 9 9 9 South Dakota 9 Texas 9 9 10-40 Utah 9 9 Vermont 9 9 40-80 Not available 24-40 Not available 35-40 9 9 9 9 Virginia 12 years Not available 3-10 years 10 years maximum 25 9 (GPS) Varies 9 Delaware DC Florida 9 Duration of supervision Washington 9 9 West Virginia 9 9 Wyoming 9 5 years Varies 5-20 years Varies 2-5 years 3-6 years Varies Not available Not available 36 months Varies 5 years 3 years 2 years Not available 82 Components were checked off if a state reported its use to some extent (however minimal). For more detail on content of programming and the frequency at which specific components are employed, please refer to individual state answer templates. 83 Refers to total contacts, not number of offenders, per PO. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 29 Appendix E: Individual State Templates Alabama Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Yes Not mandatory • Judge determines supervision for probationers • Parole is based on the discretionary decision of the three member board No • Probation: 1,242 (1,204 males, 38 females (official data from Administrative Office of Courts database) • Parole: 183 (180 males, 3 females) (official data from Administrative Office of Courts database) • State funding • Parolees pay $30/month supervision fees 2001 People placed on probation and parole are classified based on a risk/needs assessment instrument Low, medium, high Determines risk and needs Risk and needs assessment instrument developed specifically for Alabama Board of Parole and Pardons Birmingham and Mobile will sometimes have specialized caseloads if personnel are available Not available Not available Not available • No average supervision length • Parole sentences are for the remainder of the sentence • Probation sentences range from 1-15 years unless a person is sentenced under the Split Sentence Act, the period for a felony is 5 years and 2 years for a misdemeanor • The Alabama Sentencing Commission has a bill in this year to apply the limit to split sentences as well Varies by county Yes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 30 Alaska Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? • Approximately 5 years ago (June 2003), the Department of Corrections administration closed all the institutional treatment programs—not just for sex offenders but for substance abuse as well • At one point, Department of Corrections had 3 institutional programs, but the Murkowski administration did not believe that treatment worked. There was also a budget crunch • Current administration believes in the need to have institutional treatment and is trying to reinstitute it but it will take some time • Fiscal note to start programming currently before the legislature The Alaska Department of Corrections Standards of Care still exists and provides basic expectations for programs, should they be restarted Not applicable Not applicable TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Yes There is nothing prohibiting them from receiving treatment but most non-citizens tend to get deported once they are released from prison, so there is probably very few receiving treatment in the community • Males and females, but not many female sex offenders on probation/parole in Alaska • Usually females dealt with individually (not more than 5 or 6 at a time) • Generally mandatory, but because of a lack of availability, many judges will not order it • If there is no treatment available in the community where the offender lives, the judge will not order it • Individualized treatment plans generally decided by the treatment provider but in consultation with the parole officer • The treatment provider will usually have a “staffing session” with parole officers—usually there will be multiple treatment providers and parole officers— they will talk the case through and agree on a plan • State funding through Department of Corrections • Those who can afford their own are required to pay for their own 800 statewide (estimate) Not available Not available Not available • Between 25% and 30% (estimate) mainly due to a lack of resources • Not enough providers Not available Not available Not available • 18 statewide (official number, Department of Corrections) • Only 7 have full-fledged programs with group and individual and organized programs • 3 or 4 only do assessments • Some only individual work—usually not their primary work—psychologists who are brought in • Only in cities Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 31 Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Of the 7 main programs, 3 are in Anchorage, 1 in Fairbanks, 1 in Juneau, (3 largest cities) 1 in Kenai and 1 in Ketchikan (smaller cites but still easy to get to) • There is a plan to get one provider based in one of the cities to go out to Bethel on a regular basis (isolated rural community with high sexual abuse problem) 100% 0% The range is approximately 40 to 60% (estimate) • They have had standards for programs longer than any state except New Jersey— since 1988 • While the providers vary, they are all doing cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention planning, and victim empathy • Lots of individual planning—some domestic violence work • Many have substance abuse problems and providers have them get treatment for those problems elsewhere • Not directly • Make referrals to psychiatrists but it is hard to find those who will work with sex offenders—currently there are only 3 in the state • In the past, the drugs used tended to be anti-androgens; now there is some use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) • Statute on polygraphs but not mandated for programs • Logistics are still being worked out and standards have not been set yet • Closer to individualized • There are some core things shared but most treatment is individualized Not applicable (no prison-based treatment) • Wide variation • Minimum of about 18 months—used to be a year when they had prison treatment—now about two year average (estimate) Minimal • The only treatment data is a 1997 study on men who were in institutional treatment • A few numbers are collected and maintained by hand on community treatment • No uniform data collection—trying to get things started up again but very difficult Not available Not available 1997 study on institutional treatment REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Alaska Department of Corrections currently does not have an organized reentry program but is in the process of developing one Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable • The only thing available is two psychologists that travel to the institutions—they try to get to as many sex offenders as possible before release but usually only get to about half of them (estimate)—about 100 each year (estimate) • They do standard psychiatric tests and risk assessments COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies • Mandatory, generally • Some people who were given probation or parole but were rearrested for violations go back to prison and serve out the rest of the sentence (few individuals) Court and Parole Board No • Probation and Parole • Small group on furlough from institutions Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 32 Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation 782 total—divided between Probation and Parole (estimate) State • Risk assessment document from Minnesota or Wisconsin used for some time, though not validated for Alaska • Trying to implement LSI-R statewide • Classification is difficult—there is concern that if someone scores low, they will be overridden at a higher level • Officers are reluctant not to supervise someone Not available All those under supervision Low, medium, high • Trying to get probation to focus more resources and supervision on high risk and less on low risk—not yet seen as appropriate to not supervise low risk • STATIC-99, Stable and ACUTE • Parole and probation officers are trained to use these instruments • Everyone is supervised by the same division and uses the same tools • Some are supervised on specialized caseloads • Not in all areas Average size is 58 (estimate) Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) training for sexual abusers, treatment for STATIC-99 and Stable 12 years (estimate) Community-based treatment, polygraphs, housing when possible, employment Yes Minimal • The only treatment data is a 1997 study on men that were in institutional treatment • A few numbers are collected and maintained by hand on community treatment • No uniform data collection—trying to get things started up again but very difficult Not available Not available 1997 study on institutional treatment Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 33 Arizona Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • In certain facilities • Some sex offenders are in specialty housing units, others are not No Not applicable Not applicable State • All are eligible but not enough staff to offer it to all at the same time • At some point while in prison, all sex offenders will be offered treatment No Males and females Not mandatory, but available • Not mandatory • Identifies inmates that will be getting out within 3/4 years and once this group is identified, they will be offered treatment • No offense type requirements 5,216 as of February 2008 (official, Department of Corrections) 8.6% • Three: • One yard is for pre-treatment—offenders who go through pre-treatment for a year before treatment • Second yard is treatment yard (males) • Third yard is for females (females may be in different facilities) • Can have 200 inmates in active treatment • 100 in pre-treatment • 40 females No waiting lists except for females 0% 1:40 (estimate) • 1-2 years (estimate) • 1 year program but some may get longer Anywhere from 2-3 years Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention model No No Both—curriculum followed but there is individualized treatment based on unique characteristics of certain offenders No 80% (estimate) Minimum of a Master’s Degree in Behavioral Health Determine risk and needs STATIC-99, MCMI 3; Multiphasic sex inventory Not available Electronic Department of Corrections None Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 34 Arkansas Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Treatment is available in state prisons State funded Every sex offender housed in Arkansas Department of Correction is eligible for treatment Yes Males and females Treatment is a voluntary program—mentally ill persons may apply and receive treatment • Everyone is eligible • Treatment is recommended if offenders are denied parole due to the severity of the crime, age of the victim, habitual criminality, injury to victims and if any weapons were used Not available • 235 sex offenders enroll in treatment every three months (official Department of Correction figure) • 45-60 graduate every three months (estimate) Not available 235 There is generally a waiting list to participate in programming (no percentage available) 25% available at the end of a three month cycle Not available 12 months (official Department of Correction figure) 3 years prior to earliest transfer eligibility date Cognitive Behavioral Therapeutic Community Program No drugs are administered o Polygraphs and voice stress tests are used o Administered by the Sex Offenders Screening and Risk Assessment Program (SOSRA) The program is manualized, but does individualized treatment plans and counseling sessions with each sex offender Not available Not available • The state does not have specific standards at the current time • It is expected that the state will institute standards within the next two years The state has a pre-assessment which provides a small amount of information to see if the inmate is interested in receiving treatment • To provide a glimpse of sex offender’s criminal history • To assess the sex offender’s willingness to talk about his/her crime Psychosexual Life History adult male form TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Yes Yes Males and females Determined by judge or parole board • The sentencing judge or parole board stipulated specific requirements for a sex offender’s treatment (e.g., length of time spent in treatment, type of treatment, Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 35 Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation etc.) • Treatment providers make decisions about individual treatment plans Offender-funded 892 (official) 825 (official) Probation and parole are consolidated under the Department of Community Corrections 80% (estimate) 15% (estimate) 5% come directly from court (estimate) 3 (estimate) • Not available in all regions throughout the state • Available in localized areas 1 out of the 3 treatment providers (estimate) 2 out of the 3 treatment providers (estimate) 83% (estimate) Cognitive behavioral therapy 1 of the 3 providers administer anti-depressant drugs and impulse control drugs Yes Combination of individualized and manualized plans Yes 2 years Yes, the state is looking to profile sex offenders Demographic information, number on community supervision, number of victims, frequency, general psychosocial Electronically Department of Community Corrections and Arkansas Crime Information Center In the process of using the data for evaluation COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Assessment Purposes Tools Yes • Community supervision is mandatory for sex offenders if they do not serve their entire sentence in prison • Duration of community supervision depends on how much time offender serves in prison Eligibility for services is decided and stipulated by a sentencing judge or the parole board • Yes • Eligibility requirements not available Probation and parole (consolidated under the Department of Community Corrections) See above for probation and parole State funded • The Sex Offender Screening and Risk Assessment (SOSRA) agency was created when the state passed legislation in 1997 that mandated community notification • The Division of Community Corrections conducts a risk/needs assessment when offenders are sentenced or released to community supervision. The same tool is used for all sex offenders and is not specific to the sex offender population Assess risk when a sex offender is required to notify the community • STATIC-99 • The Division of Community Corrections is working on a risk/needs assessment form specifically for sex offenders—the tool is in draft form and is not yet validated Specialized caseloads Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 36 Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Sex offenders are required to be on electronic monitoring for a specified period when first sentenced or released to community supervision • Sex offenders must also be placed on maximum supervision level for a specified amount of time when first sentenced or released to community supervision • There is a sex offender aftercare program for certain sex offenders who are subjected to more stringent supervision requirements and program participation • Sex offenders in the aftercare program are required to submit to polygraphs or voice stress tests every 6 months and must participate in group meetings two times a month Not available • Specialized officers are regular probation/parole officers but receive additional training on handling sex offenders Not available • Sex offenders are eligible for any services that are available through the Department of Community Corrections • The Department of Community Corrections offers drug treatment services and day reporting centers • Referrals are provided to mental health treatment, sex offender treatment, education/job training Yes Department of Community Corrections has a statewide data system Not available Department of Community Corrections None, data is mainly used for caseload management Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 37 California Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Prison-based treatment questions (except for those highlighted with an *) are answered based on the proposed program but are not instituted as of yet Availability • No sex offender treatment programming in California prisons • Only treatment available is for substance abuse, but this is not specific to sex offenders—more general treatment program for which all prisoners are eligible • Most recently, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) received funding from the state legislature to hire research experts to develop a sex offender treatment model program for the state’s prisons • Contracted out to develop a model for California at the end of summer 2007— patterned after Colorado model • Currently, budgeting is in process to fund this initiative, but it is unclear when the funding will actually be allocated—being developed for the current budget session, but it will more likely be approved in Fiscal Year 2008 Eligibility Noncitizens No exclusion by any background characteristics Gender Males and females Mentally ill • Assumption is that they will be better served in mental health system but no decision yet • Juvenile system refers mentally ill sex offenders to the mental health system Criteria for eligibility Not available Population Sex offenders in prison population *Over 23,000 (estimate) Percentage in treatment Not available Programs Prisons with programs available Not available Average capacity Model program has capacity of just under 500 beds (does not mean this will be the actual capacity) Percentage with waiting list Not available Percentage with 25% empty slots Not available Average ratio of providers/offenders Not available Average duration Not available Enrollment date Not available Content Cognitive behavioral therapy with relapse prevention Not precluded • Drugs Not available • Truth tests Not available • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Not available Completion rate Not available Not sure whether or not treatment will be provided through in-house staff or through Provider certification contracts with private providers *STATIC-99 is official risk assessment tool for California (in probation, prison, etc.) Assessment *Individual agencies can use other instruments as well, but all treatment decisions are based on STATIC-99 scores Purposes Risk assessment score will be used to determine who gets priority for prison-based treatment Tools *Legislation commissioned a 3-member board called State Authorized Risk Assessment Tools for Sex Offenders (SARATSO), with representatives from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of Mental Health, and the Attorney General’s office to decide what tools to use *Statute lays out criteria for adoption of risk assessment tools (must be validated, cross-validated, and accepted across courts) and board is responsible for applying criteria Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 38 TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality • Treatment is available, but availability varies across the state • Of the 58 California counties, only 31 have treatment available and only 8 use polygraph tests Yes Males and females • Not mandatory for all sex offenders • At the county community level, courts and probation agencies decide who is required to attend treatment • At the state prison level, the STATIC-99 scores determine who is required to attend treatment • Offenders who score 4 or higher on the STATIC-99 are placed on high-risk sex offender caseloads, and these offenders are eligible for treatment if they are supervised in areas with treatment available • California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) pays for highrisk sex offenders to enter treatment programs for 17 months—but 500-700 sex offenders are released per month, so many do not get treatment • New programming pending for up to 2,700 offenders on parole statewide Treatment programs are developed by providers in conjunction with probation/parole officers • 3 levels of funding: 1) CDCR contracts with providers around the state that pay for high-risk parolees 2) Offenders on probation pay for treatment themselves 3) Providers are required to take on a certain percentage of indigent clients (percentage unknown but varies by county) • MediCAL does not help with court-mandated treatment 90,000 sex offenders in the state 12,000 sex offenders on probation (estimate) 10,000 sex offenders on parole (estimate) 2 sex offenders on community supervision post-release from Colinga (estimate) • CDCR contracts with providers to treat approximately 2,700 sex offenders per year • 500-700 are released per month (very small percentage of parolees served) 7% of probationers • 1-3% of parolees receive treatment with sex offender-specific therapist • 2,700 slots for sex offenders that are with contracted sex offender therapists • All others required to participate in parole outpatient counseling—2-3 hours per month with providers that do not necessarily have training in sex offender treatment Not available • Number of providers is not enough for the number of sex offenders who need treatment • Very few of the providers that are available specialize in sex offender treatment • Only 3 counties have criteria for sex offender treatment providers (San Francisco, San Diego, and Orange)—funded through Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) grants Not available Not available Not available Not available • No state standard for treatment • Both the California Coalition for Sexual Offending and the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) support the use of empirically validated approaches such as cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, etc. (not Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 39 Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation chemical castration) Drugs are sometimes administered, depending on client Medications are all voluntary—specific drug choices made by doctors Polygraphs used in 8 of 31 counties with treatment programs Only 1 county has non-prosecution agreement Individualized—there are currently no criteria for providers or certification requirements for programs • There are “model programs” that have been identified in the state, but their models are not required • Among the model programs are Sex Offender Rehabilitative Treatment Program (SORT), but there is no standard defined There is no prison treatment, although there is a proposal for such treatment • CDCR contracts for a maximum of 17 months with providers • This is determined by fiscal interests, not by treatment standards • State (i.e. CDRC, probation) does not collect treatment data • Individual providers do, but there has not been any analysis of provider data Not available Not available Not available One study underway using one county’s data, but still in early phases • • • • • REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • • Supervision Service coordination • No reentry programming in place right now • Context: 200% prison capacity; jails overcrowded as well • States contract with counties for jail funds—for counties to have access to jail funds, must have reentry facility • Goal is to have 500-bed facilities open across the state—these facilities would serve all types of offenders, but sex offenders would be housed separately • There are pre-release services • In reality, they are not used very often • STATIC-99 must be administered at 3 different points for sex offenders: o First, during pre-sentence investigation o Then again within 9 months of release from prison o Finally, a third time right before discharge from parole • Also developing a dynamic risk assessment instrument Not available No • STATIC-99 administered to all sex offenders pre-release • The use of this tool was mandated by legislation—if a sex offender scores 4 or higher on assessment, then he/she becomes a candidate for high-risk sex offender caseload (HRSO) • Also screened for sexually violent predator (SVP) status via STATIC-99—if score 4 or higher and have mental disorder, then meet criteria for SVP (see dmh.ca.gov for full list of criteria) Not available • No housing services provided in-house • Upon release sex offender has 6 days to find compliant housing (or register as transient/homeless) Not available If sex offender meets criteria for SVP then admitted to Coalinga State Hospital for mental health issues Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 40 Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Not available Not available Not available Not available COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Supervision under parole and probation (and conditional release program CONREP) • Mandatory for all sex offenders at state level • Most likely true at the county level as well (probation)—except for some misdemeanor sex offenders who are placed on summary probation (no direct contact) No, but lifetime Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring option • • • • • • 7,000-8,000 sex offenders on probation, all supervised at county level (estimate) 11,000 on parole, 8,000 of which are active in the state of California (estimate) County funds probation State funds parole STATIC-99 required Other static tools used by individual agencies as well, but only STATIC-99 is required • Legislation passed in 11/2006 that required administration of STATIC-99 • In 11/2007 board voted again to keep it officially recognized 3 points described above • STATIC-99: 1. High 2. Moderately high 3. Medium 4. Moderately low 5. Low • Risk levels vary for other tools Not available • STATIC-99 used across agencies and also in civil commitment program • Some counties have developed own customized tool • If a county is large enough to warrant sex offender-specific caseloads, then most counties have done that • In rural areas, not enough sex offenders to warrant specialized caseloads Hard to summarize probation because counties are independent • Hard to summarize probation because counties are independent • For parole, sex offenders will always be on minimum of high supervision (70:1) o If on GPS, then 40:1 o If high risk sex offender (HRSO) at least 40:1 o If HRSO and GPS, then 20:1 • Nothing in statute requires additional certification for supervisors on probation or parole, but there is specialized training from academy for parole officers • Training requirements vary for probation officers depending on county • Up to 3 years in probation (estimate) • 3, 5 or 10 years for parole (depends on offense) (official numbers) • Probation: treatment available in many counties, but in northern California may have to travel to another county to get treatment o Other services vary • Parole: services vary—obtained through referrals Discussion takes place between supervisors and service providers—more communication about sex offenders than general offenders Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 41 Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Probation has basic recidivism data (includes all revocations and arrests—needs to be broken down) • Parole has LEADS database Not available Not available None Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 42 Colorado Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity • Only in 2-3 facilities (estimate) • There may be a Spanish-speaking program in a prison as well • Yes—standard covers both prison and community treatment—one part of the standard specifically references prison-based treatment • Go to www.dcj.state.co.us for standard—follow link for Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB) • Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB)—established in Department of Criminal Justice (DCJ) via legislation in 1992 • SOMB charged to develop standards and guidelines for the evaluation, treatment, and behavioral monitoring of sex offenders • Required to write first version of standard by 1996 • Standard most recently updated in 2004 • Recently revised prison-based treatment section, should be reflected in 2008 • SOMB—also in charge of selecting providers • Not directly in charge of structuring treatment programs, but all providers must meet treatment standards that are in place, so indirectly influences programming • State-funded through Department of Corrections (DOC) • The recent increase in Colorado’s prison population has led to diversion of resources away from sex offender services • The state has developed a criminal justice commission that is charged with introducing reforms to minimize prison growth • Every sex offender eligible, but not everyone can get treatment when they want it because there are limited slots available at a given time • Offender must admit crime to participate in treatment Not entirely sure, but because treatment is available for noncitizens in the community it should be available for noncitizens in prison as well Males and females • Handled the same way as everyone else—treatment is a voluntary program, but if an offender does not participate he/she does not get good time • In addition to sex offender treatment provided at selected prisons, there is also a separate mental health prison—mentally ill offenders must choose which type of treatment is more important because they cannot be in both places at once • Everyone is eligible but there is a waiting list that is prioritized by release date • Treatment administered when an offender gets within a couple of years of release date 1,171 sex offenders under lifetime imprisonment through June 30, 2007 (official Department of Corrections number) • 157 of 1,171 lifetime-imprisoned offenders (13.4%) in treatment as of 6/30/07 • 200-300 sex offenders total estimated to be in treatment (a really rough estimate) Treatment programming divided into Phase I and Phase II • Phase I is introduction to treatment programming • Phase II is a therapeutic community model for advanced sex offender treatment • 5 prisons (Fremont Correctional Facility, Sterling Correctional Facility, Youthful Offender System, Colorado Territorial Correctional Facility, and Colorado Women's Correctional Facility) have Phase I programming • 2 of these prisons also offer Phase II, in addition to one other facility (Arrowhead Correctional Facility, Colorado Women's Correctional Facility, and Youthful Offender System) • When fully staffed, 700 total Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 43 Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Right now working at half capacity due to staffing problems 100% 0% • Standards dictate maximum ratio, which is: 1:8 • No group can exceed 12 sex offenders so absolute max is 2:12 Phase I: 8-12 months (4.6 in FY 07) Phase II: 1 year (estimate) (7.6 in FY 07) 2 years prior to release (estimate) Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, impulse control, psychoeducation, gender role socialization, etc. (19 total--in Standards Section 3) • On a case-by-case basis • No chemical castration Polygraph used Individualization of treatment to each offender Not required, but nonparticipation can have negative impact (i.e., required for release onto lifetime supervision for offenders who would otherwise be incarcerated) Not available • Board has a standard—outlined in Section 4 of Standards (page 43) • Part of standard dictates that a provider must have a certain number of clinical hours in which to co-facilitate with an experienced provider before they are allowed to facilitate on their own • Risk and needs assessment conducted at intake in DOC; reassessed along the way on supervision as well • Assessment mainly for treatment purposes • To place in treatment based on risk of sexual reoffense (to identify type of treatment that is appropriate) • Not specifically looking for high-risk though, etc. • In standards—on page 23. • Colorado does not have a customized tool No current data from DOC but evaluation conducted in 2003 • Level of treatment completed, outcomes such as recidivism released to parole, etc. • Sex offender crossover behavior—offending behavior, victim patterns, etc. Case files manually entered into database DOC has case files, database in Division of Criminal Justice Study in 2003 looking at outcomes for Sex Offender Treatment Program (not been updated since then) TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Yes—more availability in the community than in prison Not entirely sure, but because treatment is available for noncitizens in the community it should be available for noncitizens in prison as well Males and females • Every sex offender eligible, but not everyone can get treatment when they want it because there are limited slots available at a given time • Offender must admit crime to participate in treatment • Treatment provider is responsible for treatment • Team (provider, supervising officer, polygraph officer) collaborates on decisions about offenders (section 5 of standards—pg. 63) • Offender-funded • Funding in probation and parole that can be used when there is a need; also can be used as an incentive if a district’s budget permits • 2,088 adults (520 lifetime), 516 juveniles (official as of June 30, 2007) • Numbers include both Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) and regular supervision Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 44 Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Of 2,088 adult offenders, 1,026 are regular supervision, 1,062 are ISP Not available Not available • Vast majority (it is required on community supervision) (estimate) • Not required to be on treatment for duration of supervision (i.e. if long sentence, do not have to be in treatment for all of it) • Aftercare program in development Not available Not available As of November 1, 2007, 179 treatment providers for adults Majority of judicial districts, but only about half of the counties have treatment providers Probably none Not available Not available Same as prison • On a case-by-case basis • No chemical castration Polygraph used Individualization of treatment to each offender Yes—prison provider sends info on treatment progress to community provider 2.5-4 years • Outcomes, recidivism, technical violators, etc. • Demographic info in DOC Electronically Probation, but probably not DOC None REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services • Most offenders do not come out into any sort of reentry program—most go onto parole and some into community corrections, but aside from supervision there is not a formal reentry initiative in place for sex offenders • The state also uses a shared living arrangement program for sex offenders— program is developed by providers and used by the state • Offenders live together, but not with supervisor—this will be assigned on a caseby-case basis • Circles of Support and Accountability model (COSA)—community volunteers help provide support for sex offenders (program numbers are low though) • COSA is a Canadian model developed in Mennonite Church Case managers give offenders a list of resources but do not assist them with services Not available Not available COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Yes—on probation, parole, and community corrections Mandatory Not applicable • Yes • Eligibility requirements described in Statute 18-1.3-1004 (indeterminate sentencing); eligibility determined by offense type/classification • Probation estimate: on June 30, 2007—1,066 on State Probation Specialized Programs Sex Offender Intensive Supervision Program (SOISP) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 45 Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • • • • 1,026 on non-SOISP State and local funding for probation Parole funded by state Assessment at time of sentencing to determine level of supervision (see statute for risk classification) • Also assessed for sexually violent predator (SVP) status • Additionally, probation uses the Oregon sex offender risk assessment instrument to classify people into supervision levels (minimum, medium, maximum within each regular and ISP supervision); reassess every 6 months Sexually Violent Predator statute enacted in 1999 • Supervision classification • All sex offenders required to have pre-sentence investigation report (PSI) and risk assessment at time of sentencing (release from prison) 1. Regular supervision 2. ISP (All sex offenders on specialized caseloads though) Also assessed for SVP status (based on risk assessment tool developed and validated in Colorado) Probationers—at sentencing; parolees assessed prior to release • Risk assessment and treatment needs (e.g., assess if the person amenable to treatment) • Treatment progress as well (on probation, offenders reassessed every 6 months) • Level of Service Inventory (LSI) and Oregon sex offender risk assessment for probationers (Oregon tool has not been validated in Colorado) • Providers use instruments listed in standards [pg 23] • Yes—on probation and parole • Probation has Sex Offender Intensive Supervision Program (SOISP) for felons and lifetime supervision, as well as non-SOISP specialized caseloads • GPS for some high-risk offenders • SOISP program has three phases • 25 cases per officer on SOISP • Standard of 35 cases per officer on non-SOISP caseloads, but most caseloads are much higher • Officers required to get specialized training • Two training programs for probation officers: Intro to Sex Offender Management (24 hrs), Advanced Sex Offender Management training (72 hrs) • Training involves sex offender-specific topics, defensive training, motivational interviewing, cognitive overview, law and liability • Varies based on sentence—sex offenders cannot be released early • Can be up to 10 or more years On probation, services available in the following areas: treatment, polygraphs, housing, transportation dollars, emergency healthcare, clothing, food vouchers Between supervision and treatment but not between supervision and other agencies (i.e. no comprehensive discussions) • Probation has aggregate data on intakes, pre-sentence investigations (PSI), discharges, terminations, supervision level, revocation types, violation types, risk level • FY 2007: 1,013 adults and 204 juveniles had PSIs • 15,440 total adult offenders received PSIs (7% for sex offenders) • 2,640 total juvenile offenders received PSIs (8% for sex offenders) Electronic probation data Probation 9 year follow-up looking at violence and re-arrest as predicted by sex offender risk scale—was predictive Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 46 Connecticut Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs o Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • Available in 6 facilities (including female and juvenile facilities) • No specialized facilities for sex offenders, but these are facilities that house highrisk offenders (sex offenders are risk level 3 or higher) • Implemented in 2000 by Sex Offender Policy and Advisory Committee (SOPAC) • Sets out series of treatment standards that private providers must follow (stateemployed providers are exempt) SOPAC includes representatives from sex offender treatment, Department of Mental Health, Department of Children and Family Services, Judicial Department, Public Defenders, Psychiatric Security Review Board, Office of Policy & Management, Department of Mental Retardation, Sexual Abuse/Victim Advocacy (30-35 members total) Department of Correction (DOC) currently provides oversight, but the state is trying to put a risk board in place • State-funded, through DOC • No private contractors—DOC contracts with state employees of University of Connecticut Health Center for all treatment needs • Because these are state employees they are not subject to treatment standards, but they tend to follow them pretty closely • Voluntary treatment—individual must acknowledge a problem sexual behavior (no ABEL or polygraph) and have ability to function in a group (cognitively and behaviorally) • Eligibility determined in-house—not enough resources for everyone so have to prioritize who gets treatment Yes Males and females • Not required for mentally ill • Those who are seriously mentally ill (Axis 1 disorders) go to White Inc Forensic (on grounds of state hospital) Not mandatory for all offenders (Supreme Court decision) 25% of prison population (estimate) 1% (estimate) 6 6 staff total All except women’s program 0% Not available 12 months, but varies greatly depending on where people are incarcerated and severity of risk level 2+ years before release • Group-based treatment, with family sessions as an ancillary component • Cognitive-behavioral therapy, victim empathy, arousal control • Provera and Lupron used, but more people on Prozac and other drugs Not used in prison, but polygraphs used in community Not required, but unlikely for someone to get parole if they do not go through treatment No certification requirements because prison treatment is administered by state Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 47 Assessment Purposes Assessments are administered at intake (nothing administered at completion of treatment) • STATIC-99, RRASOR, psychopathy checklist (PCL) • Instruments have not been validated on Connecticut population Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Demographic data used mainly for tracking purposes Paper files DOC None TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality • Available on probation and parole (both are state-level) • Both use the same treatment provider (The Connection, Inc. Center for the Treatment of Problem Sexual Behavior) Yes—but hardly happens because they are being deported Male and female • All offenders released from prison or sentenced to probation are to be evaluated by provider • If provider determines that an offender does not need treatment, then he/she is dismissed from the requirement (as decided by supervisor and provider) Developed by provider • Treatment on probation funded by Judicial Department • Treatment on parole funded by Department of Correction, Department of Mental Health, Department of Mental Retardation 1,600 on probation (estimate) 120 on parole (estimate) Not applicable • 85-90% go through treatment (estimate) • Many complete treatment before supervision is done, so at any given time the actual percentage in treatment will be lower Not available Not available Not available • State contracts with one group to administer treatment to probationers and parolees (The Connection Inc, Center for the Treatment of Problem Sexual Behavior [CTPSB]) • Contract has been in place for about 20 years. • CTPSB employs a staff of 30 to do cognitive-behavioral treatment in community • There are times when an offender receives treatment from another provider, though. This usually happens under the following circumstances: o Attorney cuts deal in court o Risk level is too low to warrant using CTPSB resources o Offender failed with CTPSB and court gave another chance o CTPSB full in certain programming area • 25 providers in-house • 3 other programs statewide that see offenders (account for about 300 clients) • Another dozen providers who do group treatment Statewide (16 sites around state) No waiting list—as numbers increase, size of program increases Not applicable 72% (estimate) • Group-based treatment • Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, arousal control (through medication), pro-social skill-building Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 48 Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Programming based on risk level (low, medium, high, each with different curriculum) Yes • Yes—polygraphs (sexual history, maintenance and monitoring, and instant offense) • CTPSB will work with clients up to 6 months regardless of whether or not they deny the offense—they are terminated if fail instant offense test after 6 months • Manualized within risk level but not done in workbook style • Individual treatment plans completed • Information sharing between prison and community supervision, but programming is not continuous • Part of the reason is that the majority of people who come from prison have not had any treatment programming Average of 3 years (estimate) Not available Electronic • CTPSB • Probation/Parole Submit reports to funders but they are not available to the public REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Yes Yes • 100% of facilities have some type of reentry services—required by the state • 9 facilities provide very specific reentry skills • 6 facilities have job centers in conjunction with Department of Labor—where offenders have access to jobs, develop resume, mock interviews, referrals • Comprehensive statewide reentry plan – developed by State Office of Planning and Management and Criminal Justice Policy Advisory Committee • Overseen by State Office of Planning and Management • Governing board: Criminal Justice Policy Advisory Committee (multi-agency advisory) Yes, but not residential Everyone eligible under Offender Accountability Plan Do not track by offense type Do not track by offense type No—reentry is voluntary Not available Not available • Department of Correction (DOC) • Probation 1. 2. Board of Pardons and Parole (discretionary release for terms of greater than 2 years) Commissioner of Corrections (for those with terms less than 2 years) • Criteria: based on objective measurement (Salient Factor Score) and warden’s decision (exercised on case-by-case basis)—done by contracted evaluation services • DOC does not include sex offenders in eligibility for discretionary release • Risk assessment instruments are used pre- and post-release: o Pre-release: STATIC 99, SOSP III (Sex Offender Screening Protocol – adjusted actuarial)–give overall risk assessment (high moderate, low Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 49 moderate, low) Post release: RRASOR, STATIC-99, VASOR, Screening for Pedophilic Interest, VRAG, LSI-R o For specific dynamic risk: Stable and ACUTE 2007, ABEL Assessment of Sexual Interest, polygraph examinations Reentry planning starts at intake Individual programs usually begin 1 year or less before release Transitional video workbook program (provides concrete reentry services, i.e. where is the Department of Motor Vehicles, jobs, Social Security, benefits, clothing, where to get licenses, etc) Fingers in the Community–DOC Reentry Programs o 8 facilities (700 offenders to date)–cognitive-behavioral therapy, addiction services/relapse prevention, complete workgroup Education Department–22 session reentry preparation program where offenders go through mock interviews, practice filling out job applications online, learn how to access schools in community, receive continuing education o Complete workgroup and action plan Correctional counselors for general reentry needs Teams meet as well o Enrollment date Services available • • • • • Case management Post-release services Case management o Supervision o Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • • Faith-based Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • • Special management units (8 parole officers statewide) Not available • Once individual has been released to community, correctional counselors have no further obligation • Parole officer gets parole summary and packet of information • Post-release supervisors also coordinate post-release services • Nonprofit agencies serve as primary evaluation and treatment specialists • Involved in all reentry services 10% (estimate) Provide housing services, outpatient treatment, anger management, mental health services, mentoring • Sex offenders have access to all non-residential programs that are available to other offenders (employment, drug/alcohol) • Some restrictions for residential/half-way houses None Not available Not available Not available Not available COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Probation and Parole are both state-level functions • Not mandatory for sex offenders • 2 sentences to community supervision: 1) Straight suspended sentence—for example, 10 years execution suspended 10 years probation. The offender is sentenced directly to probation, but if at any time during his probation the court determines that a violation has occurred, the offender can be sent to a correctional facility and serve the original 10 years 2) Split-sentence Policy—for example, 10 years execution suspended after 5 years and 10 years probation. The offender serves 5 years in a correctional facility and then starts his 10 year probation period. If at any time during his probation, the court determines that a violation has occurred, the offender can be sent back to the correctional facility to complete the remaining 5 years that were originally suspended Judicial decisions Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 50 Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation No, but there is a 35-year probation for 8-9 statutory offenses (including sexual assault in 1st degree, risk of injury to minor, etc) • Probation and Parole • Also Special Parole—if an offender is sentenced to special parole they can only serve a maximum of 5 years, including time spent in prison for violations, etc. (i.e. time does not stop at any point) • Cannot have Special Parole and probation at the same time for the same charge • Probation: 1,162 high/medium risk sex offenders as of January 1, 2008 (official estimate from CMIS) • Parole: 150 (estimate) • DOC for parole • Judicial for probation • Classification into risk levels using static and dynamic scores (University of Connecticut Health uses STATIC-99 and RRASOR; probation officers use LSIR) • Offenders reassessed every 3 months using dynamic and acute actuarial scores • First implemented in 1995 • Updated in 2005 • In process of being updated again All sex offenders High, medium • Risk/needs classification • Determination of treatment and supervision protocol In both probation and parole • Smaller caseloads • Collaboration between victim’s advocate, probation officers, and treatment providers • By statute, judge can impose electronic monitoring, GPS • 40 on probation (estimate) • 20 on parole (estimate) • At least 2 years experience preferred (if not then team up with more experienced supervisor) • Bachelor’s of Science degree • Probation officers sit in on treatment groups as regularly as possible • Officers participate in specialized training (32 hours initial) • 10 years for probation • Parole varies depending on how much time is owed • Same services that are available to general population, plus weekly specialized sex offender counseling • Treatment includes rehabilitation and reasoning (taking responsibility for actions) • AIC programs help with job placement, vocational training, substance programs Yes—most offices have one team meeting per month (group meeting between all officers and all treatment providers, along with victim advocates, to go through all cases) • CMIS system • If individual is on sex offender registry with conviction in past ten years, can be classified as a sex offender Electronic Probation data maintained by Court Support Services Division (CSSD) No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 51 Delaware Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content o Drugs o Truth tests o Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Treatment only in 1 prison (Delaware Correctional Center) out of 4 in the state (1 women’s facility, 3 men’s facilities) • State just passed legislation to create Sex Department of Correction (DOC) might have Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB), and part of that legislation requires the development of standards across prison and community—not in existence yet Legislation passed at end of 2007 DOC oversees prison treatment to date, but SOMB will take it over in the future Stated funded through DOC Available for all sex offenders, but due to lack of resources/space not everyone gets it Probably Males Eligible for the same types of treatment as other sex offenders Not applicable 661 as of April 21, 2008 Not available 1 300 Usually a waiting list of 100 0% 1:150 24 months Usually begin treatment within 2 years of release date—ideally is 6 months prior to release Cognitive-behavioral therapy Not used unless individual is involved in mental health treatment (diagnosed through mental health board) Probably not Mixture No—unless structured this way by sentencing order Not available • None currently, but there will be once a SOMB is established • Correctional counselors administer treatment in prisons For risk more than needs, but just submitted grant to Bureau of Justice Assistance for needs assessment • LSI-R (in community corrections too) • In process of validating it Yes—DACS system Demographic data, program completion Electronic DOC No evaluations on sex offender treatment, just substance abuse TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Available through private providers, but limited availability Probably Males and females Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 52 Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not mandatory right now, but may become mandatory under new legislation Developed by provider Offender fees • Probation and Parole are consolidated • 839 as of December 2007 (estimate) As above As above Not applicable 28% as of December 2007 (estimate) As above As above Not applicable 1 private contractor with multiple offices Statewide Not available Not available Not available Cognitive-behavioral therapy Not used as part of sex offender treatment—but some offenders may go to private providers on their own, and these providers may use drugs Polygraph used Mixture but more individualized Probably not Varies Can track those that go to treatment, but only private providers have specifics on treatment program Not available Not available Not available Not available REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date • No reentry initiative, but there are pre-release programs • Offenders may or may not see a counselor • No needs assessment • Reentry subcommittee looks at points in system where improvements are needed • 500 total served in a year (estimate) No 100% No—but sex offenders have access to general pre-release services described below Not available All sex offenders are eligible for pre-release services Not applicable No, but there are policies within the Department of Correction (DOC) Not applicable Not applicable State-funded through DOC • Delaware has truth-in-sentencing—offenders serve 85% of sentence (recalculated for good time) • Parole Board is the authority for cases that came before truth-in-sentencing • Varies by prison, but generally services begin when an offender has 2 years or Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 53 Services available Case management Post-release services Case management o Supervision o Service coordination Nonprofit involvement o Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation less left in sentence • Try to begin as close to release date as possible • Life skills, anger management, cognitive-behavioral therapy, father readiness, career readiness, budgeting, decision-making strategies • Specific services vary across prisons None Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable • There are a number of local nonprofits that do post-release reentry services—most do not work directly with sex offender but a few do (under 10 slots available for sex offenders across the state) • Nonprofits do not coordinate with state officials in service delivery The only nonprofits that serve sex offenders are faith-based • Case management—help offenders find housing, employment, etc. • Mentoring/support • Transportation services Services are available for 6 months to 1 year Not available Not available • DOC has data on individuals in pre-release programming • Nonprofits maintain info on post-release services None—some nonprofits do their own research, but none on sex offenders COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Yes—under consolidated probation and parole • Not mandatory for sex offenders, depends on sentence • Most sex offenders are required to be supervised in the community Judicial decision under sentencing guidelines No Not available State-funded through DOC Not available Not available Not available Not available To assess risk LSI-R Yes • Just passed legislation to put sex offenders on GPS • In addition to standard conditions of supervision, sex offenders may be subject to the following: 1. Participate in sex offender assessment, evaluation, and treatment as determined by the Department of Correction. The offenders will be financially responsible for all examinations and treatment unless the Department of Correction finds the offender is financially unable to pay 2. Prohibit access or possession of sexually explicit and/or obscene material unless approved by the Probation Officer 3. Comply with all statutory requirements imposed upon individuals convicted of a sex offense including but not limited to compliance with 11 Del. Code Section 8510 requiring the submission of photographs, fingerprints and identification, sex offender registration (11 Del. Code Section 4120), Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 54 Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation community notification (11 Del. Code Section 4121), and DNA collection (29 Del. Code Section 4713) and limitations regarding contact with school zones (11 Del. Code Section 1112) 4. Prohibit contact or residing with children under the age of 18 unless approved by the Probation Officer 5. Prohibit access, possession or control over or use of a computer device, modem or network interface device. Any device or storage medium of an offender whose use has been approved by the Department of Correction is subject to random examination by the Probation Officer to determine compliance with this requirement. Using a computer modem or network interface device for any purpose which might further sexual activity is strictly prohibited. If violation of this provision is found, the Department of Correction may seize the computer, related equipment and storage devices 6. To require submission to polygraph testing to assist in the treatment and supervision of the offender. The failure of a polygraph test alone may not be a basis to violate the offender’s probation 7. Require no contact with the victim of the crime unless otherwise approved by the Probation Officer 25 (estimate) Specialized training through the Center for Sex Offender Management Varies by individual depending on sentence handed down • Nonprofits provide most services • Sex offenders have access to services for general offender population such as education, vocational trainings, etc.—but there is nothing specifically geared toward sex offenders • Housing services are more difficult to provide because sex offenders are not eligible for Section 8 housing • Depends on probation officer • Not much collaboration with service providers, but goal of SOMB is to tighten relations Demographics Electronically Probation-- Supervisor of sex offender unit keeps data on clients No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 55 Florida Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED • No formally sanctioned sex offender treatment in prison • There is some informal treatment in prison, but very limited – some clinicians may do informal treatment Availability TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Males and females Mandatory for those with specified sex offenses: Lewd or Lascivious Offenses committed upon or in the presence of persons less than 16 years of age; Sexual Performance by a child; Selling or Buying of Minors (according to 948.30) By private treatment providers Individual 1,076 Not available 142 on Community Control 60 programs Statewide 0% 0% Not available • Most programs are cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, arousal reconditioning, victim empathy, cognitive behavioral therapy to lower negative mood states, relationships • Above varies because there is no standard. Legislation 948.30 required qualified practitioner to provide treatment for sex offenders • People are urged to go to programs where therapists are members of Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) Yes—anti-androgen law enacted in 1997 (Chemical Castration law 1997), but probably very rarely used Yes—standard condition for sex offender probation Individualized Not applicable (no prison-based treatment) 2.5 years No Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Yes Yes Not available Serious and Violent Reentry Initiative No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 56 Population • Pre-release • Post-release Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Anybody released from prison is eligible Not available Not available State Department of Corrections • Florida Parole Commissions • Based on sentencing guidelines, which are determined upon sentencing (determines release date) Upon entry to prison (discharge planning, education, vocational training, counseling on attitudes about supervision—currently pilot program to bring this to county jail— and education about conditions) Not available Sex offenders have specialized probation officers Professional correctional specialists • Not same as prison case manager • Information exchanged on as-needed basis, but this probably very rarely happens • Link in prison is classification officer Not available Yes, but not for sex offenders Not available Nonprofits offer full continuum of services: residential, outpatient counseling, food banks, employment assistance, etc. Not available Yes Entire status: employment, treatment, housing, etc Electronic Department of Corrections Yes COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Yes Not everyone is eligible • Anybody who meets criteria as sexual offender or sexual predator and placed on community supervision on sex offense gets these conditions • Court/judge determines No State Risk classification based solely on conviction Not available All Sexual predator (for those convicted of 1st degree or 2 separate 2nd degree) and sex offender Mental health evaluation, assessment of risk Risk assessment Not available Yes Senior staff, specialized training Up to 20 per officer Not available Varies—most from 5 to 15 years No formal services—up to offender and probation/parole officer to link with state programs for employment, etc. • No case manager, just parole/probation officer • Up to their discretion how much case management activity they do Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 57 Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Frequent contact with therapist, etc. Yes Not available Electronic Department of Corrections Yes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 58 Georgia Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Males and females Sentencing judges decide during the sentencing if the special condition of sex offender treatment will be imposed Sentencing judges decide during the sentencing, but treatment providers also make the determination if left to them by the judges Offender-funded 6,022 (official) Not available Not applicable 72.7% (official, poll of the field) Not available Not applicable 34 Statewide 0% Not available Not available Denial, sexual arousal control, cognitive restructuring, relapse prevention, knowledge and skill, family and other social support network, empathy enhancement, interpersonal skills training, emotional management, contact with children, family reunification and visitation Chemical castration, if ordered by judge Polygraphs Both—treatment providers have to follow minimum guidelines but they are allowed flexibility within those minimum guidelines Not applicable (no prison-based treatment) Not available None collected Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Yes Yes 100% (official, scorecard, data warehouse) • National Institute of Correction’s Transition from Prison to the Community Initiative (http://www.nicic.org/TPCGeorgia) • Fatherhood Initiative • Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) • Georgia Reentry Impact Project (GRIP) No • All offenders are eligible for reentry services • Certain initiatives exclude sex offenders Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 59 Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • 118 in the Reentry Skills-Building Program • 59 in In House Transitional Centers • 2 in Transitional Centers • All of above are official numbers, DOC database Not available Not available No, but currently developing Standard Operation Procedures for Reentry Not applicable Operation, Planning and Development Division • State Board of Pardons and Paroles • Criteria: nature of offense, past criminal history, victim statements, pre-sentence investigations At intake • In-house transition centers, building cognitive skills, vocational education, and substance abuse treatment, PIE (prison industry enhancement) programs—job skills training (http://www.nicic.org/TPCGeorgia), support and services to fathers • Drug treatment, sex offender treatment referrals • Counselors are assigned to inmates upon entry to a facility • When on probation/parole, a specialized officer is assigned • Not same case manager as in prison • After they are released they are assigned to a specialized probation/parole officer who has been trained in the offender’s needs Not available Parole/probation officer refers treatment that meets specific needs Yes 50% (estimate) No-cost or reduced fees for treatment, residential, food and job assistance. • State and local agencies and community service providers offer assistance with employment, housing and other needs • Services available at least through probation/parole Class and program completion Offender tracking system Department of Corrections Yes COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Yes • Not mandatory • Determined by State Law or Judges Order Community supervision is determined by the sentencing judge or the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole Yes, offenders may receive lifetime supervision for the following offenses: Kidnapping (when victim is under 14), Rape, Aggravated Sodomy, Aggravated Child Molestation, Aggravated Sexual Battery Sex offenders on probation are supervised by Specialized Supervision Officers who only deal with sex offenders and receive training on the supervision of those offenders • 6,022 on probation (official) • Number not available for parole State Yes Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 60 Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • All offenders required by law to register. • All cases that were originally charged with an offense required to register by O.C.G.A. 42-1-12, but were reduced to a non-registerable offense • Any offender sentenced for an offense required by O.C.G.A. 42-1-12 to register, but is not required to register due to date of conviction (or FOA status) • All cases court-ordered to attend sex offender treatment and/or undergo a sex offender evaluation Standard, Medium, High, Max Yes To determine the offender’s propensity to re-offend STATIC-99 Yes Reduced caseload and contacts, additional special conditions • Based on contacts • Officer can not exceed 160 total contacts per month • Contacts include face to face contacts, collateral contacts (someone other than the offender, treatment providers, family, other law enforcement) Basic Sex Offender Management Training (new officers), annual Sex Offender Management Training Not available Sex Offender Treatment, Georgia Department of Labor • Yes, they are given points of contact with each respective Sheriff’s Office • Department also partners with all levels of law enforcement (i.e. Georgia Department of Family and Children’s Services) Total number of offenders, types of offenses, revocations SCRIBE – Department’s database Georgia Department of Correction’s Office of Planning and Analysis Study on child sex offenders Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 61 Idaho Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Pre-treatment is available in some of the medium custody facilities Yes Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) providers Department of Corrections (DOC) State-funded through the Department of Corrections All sex offenders are eligible Are eligible as long as there is no Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) hold Males only • Mentally ill offenders are eligible for treatment • May be excluded as a result of a psychological evaluation • Must be within 1 year of parole hearing date • Must agree to a degree of the offense (i.e. take responsibility) • Must have a psychological evaluation • Must agree to treatment 1,346 (official DOC number) • 19% of sex offenders are in institutional programs and education • 8% of sex offenders are in sex offender-specific treatment/cognitive self-change programs 3 of 6 prisons have some treatment available 12-15 beds 100% (estimate) 0% (estimate) 1:12 (estimate) • Sex Offender Treatment Phase I: 8 months • Moral Recognition Therapy: 26 weeks • Cognitive Self-Change Phase I: Not available 6-12 months prior to release (official DOC) Cognitive behavioral therapy No Polygraph used Blend Not required 85% (official DOC) • ATS-certified • Master’s level psychology or social work degree • State license • 20 Continuing Education Units per year • • • • • • • To define risks and needs Treatability Psychological Assessments Personal Inventory MnSOST Static-99 LSI-R Some data is collected but the type was not specified Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 62 Storage Maintenance Evaluation Central Integrated System DOC No TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Males and females • Sentencing Authority makes decisions about treatment • If the Sentencing Authority decrees that someone is not supervised as a sex offender, then he/she is not eligible for treatment • DOC • Treatment providers • Offender-funded • Some grant money available 728 (official) 260 (official) Not applicable Numbers are not available for all districts – the numbers below apply to the Boise area (District 4) which manages one-third of all sex offenders on community supervision 94% 94% Not applicable 12 (estimate) All 7 districts have providers 0% 0% (estimate) Not available Some medical management Polygraph used Blend • It depends on a variety of factors • Some start over while some have to go back to the beginning • 2.5 years • Aftercare is ongoing (in District 4, lasts for the entire supervision period) Some data is collected but the type was not specified Central Integrated System DOC No REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Yes Yes Not available • Nothing specifically for sex offenders • Reentry plays a small role in the work of the Idaho Criminal Justice Council, a group put together by the Governor’s Office • The legislature recently committed $4.5 million to work on reentry substance abuse issues Yes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 63 Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • • • • All sex offenders are eligible Services are not mandatory 19% of sex offenders are in institutional programs and education 8% of sex offenders are in sex offender-specific treatment/cognitive self-change programs • 24% are in internal programs • External programs are not included so the total number who participate in reentry programs is likely higher No Not applicable Not applicable • Grant programs • State (very little) • Offenders • Providers • Parole Commission • Criteria: time served, behavior, treatment attended • Parole Commission does not use assessment tools but will look at the results of assessments done by DOC 6 months to 1 year (official) • Sex Offender Treatment Phase – pre-treatment • Pre-release Classes • Polygraph • Each offender is assigned a manager upon entry to the prison • The case worker usually changes as they move from facility to facility • Many are social workers, but they do not have to be licensed • There are no case workers specific to sex offenders Not the same case manager as in prison Sex Offender Specialized Caseload Officers (probation and parole officers) File sharing, internal data sharing, and communication including by email about cases Yes • A small percentage of nonprofits are faith-based • There is one organization based in Boise that plays an important role • Generally they oversee their own programs • Mainly offer help with housing (shelters and homes), clothing, job training etc. • Vocational rehabilitation • Drug and alcohol treatment • Cognitive core programming • Transitional funds for housing • Assistance with polygraph • Anything else that offenders are eligible for as long as it doesn’t violate anything in their sex offender agreement Some data is collected but the type was not specified Central Integrated System DOC No COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Yes Not mandatory Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 64 Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Whether they are released to parole or because time expired • Although rare, Judge may not order sex offender treatment • Determined by court or Parole Commission Yes, for those receiving life sentences Probation and Parole Probation: 728 (official) Parole: 260 (official) • Offenders (through cost of supervision) • State • Some Grant Programs Yes Modified in February 2007 All offenders Levels 1, 2, and 3 (with 3 being the highest) Yes • Risk, needs, and treatability • LSI-R • RRASOR • STATIC-99 • Treatment and Progress Scale (TPS) Yes Additional Training – higher standards • 40-75 (estimate) • If the supervising officer is new, the numbers will be kept lower • Number depends on the risk levels of the offenders supervised 20 hours of special sex offender training annually in addition to the 40 hours all officers are required to complete • Between FY2000 and 2007, there were 1,278 sex offenders released from felony probation: 51% completed supervision and were discharged, spending an average of 64 months on supervision prior to discharge; 19% failed and were sent to retained jurisdiction (intermediate program lasting 120 days); 30% were revoked and sent to prison • Between FY2000 and 2007, there were 661 sex offenders released from felony probation: 34% completed supervision and were discharged, spending an average of 45 months on supervision prior to discharge; 66% violated parole and were committed to parole violator status by Board (63% of these were revoked and the remaining reinstated) • Vocational rehabilitation • Drug and alcohol treatment • Cognitive core programming • Transitional funds for housing • Assistance with polygraph • Anything else that offenders are eligible for as long as it does not violate anything in their sex offender agreement Frequent collaboration Some data is collected but the type was not specified Central Integrated System DOC No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 65 Illinois Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • • Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • In 7 facilities throughout the state • There are no specialized sex offender facilities; however, approximately 75% of the inmates at Big Muddy Correctional Facility are sex offenders. This facility also houses offenders who have been civilly committed as Sexually Dangerous Yes, the Illinois Sex Offender Management Board produces the standards Sex Offender Management Board developed all the standards and are based on the Colorado Sex Offender Management Board and Association for Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) standards Sex Offender Management Board State funded • Every sex offender is eligible for treatment if they want it • Participation in treatment is voluntary Yes • Males and females • Since there are a low number of female sex offenders, females mainly participate in individual treatment Handled the same way as everyone else—treatment is a voluntary program so mentally ill sex offenders are not required to receive treatment Must admit or partially admit to sex offense in order to be eligible to receive treatment 6,800 sex offenders in prison (estimate) 3% in treatment (estimate) • 7 prisons (names of all prisons not specified) • Varies from program to program • At Big Muddy River Correctional Facility the capacity is 93 sex offenders • At Graham Correctional Center the capacity is 50 offenders • The other 5 facilities have about 10 slots available at each site Almost all programs have waiting lists 0% • No more than 10-12 individuals should participate in a group treatment session • Sometimes there is one provider and some groups have co-therapists • The group size should not exceed 12 regardless of the number of therapists o In the two larger programs listed above, treatment typically lasts for 2 years (estimate) o The treatment duration at the five smaller programs varies In the two larger programs listed above, treatment begins approximately 2 years prior to an offender’s release and usually no more than five years prior to the release date Cognitive behavioral therapy, arousal control techniques, relapse prevention, victim empathy, and psychoeducation programs Not administered in prison-based treatment, but are sometimes administered in the state’s civil commitment program No Follows a basic manualized model, but treatment providers tailor the treatment to make it specific to the offender’s needs and crime Not required for release because treatment is completely voluntary Not available • The Illinois Sex Offender Management Board sets the standards for treatment providers • In order to be approved to provide sex offender treatment, an applicant must: a) hold Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 66 a bachelor’s degree or higher in social work, psychology, marriage and family therapy, counseling, psychiatry, or other coursework within which degree the applicant can verify successful completion of coursework in assessment, social problems, abnormal psychology, counseling skills, or similar therapeutic discipline; b) have 400 hours of supervised experience in the treatment of sex offenders in the last 4 years, at least 200 of which are face-to-face therapy with sex offenders; and c) have at least 40 hours documented training in the specialty of sex offender assessment/treatment/management Offenders assessed for treatment needs • To understand an offender’s offense history, readiness for treatment, cognitive abilities and risk factors • The Department of Corrections also conducts pre-release evaluations—this evaluation looks at how successful a parolee would be on supervision (e.g., is there family support, does the offender have a place to live, etc.) • The pre-release report incorporates both static and dynamic factors of the offender • STATIC-99, MnSOST-R • There is also an Illinois-specific assessment Collect data on which offenders return to prison on violations and victims violations Not available Not available Not available No evaluations have been conducted Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots • Yes, there are two offices where the Illinois Department of Corrections provides sex offender treatment—one in Chicago and one in East St. Louis—these programs are funded by the Illinois Department of Corrections • The state also has a contractual program in Carbondale • The state does not have programs in other areas—offenders who live in other areas have to go to private treatment providers Yes, for those who are not deported Males and females Not available • Treatment providers make decisions about individualized treatment plans—whether it be a state or privately funded program • The parole agent and the treatment provider work together within a containment model to create the treatment plan Combination of state and private funding Not applicable 1,100 (estimate) Not applicable Not applicable • 85% in treatment • The 15% who are not in treatment either have some intense levels of mental illness that prevent them from being able to participate in treatment or may have just been released from prison and have yet to be evaluated for treatment • Also, some areas of the state (remote and rural) do not have qualified treatment providers to conduct sex offender-specific therapy Not applicable 400 (estimate) Located throughout the state Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 67 Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not available • Similar to in-prison treatment • Community-based treatment also includes some adjunct family therapy and individual counseling if appropriate Not available Polygraphs are administered Same as in-prison treatment (combination of individualized and manualized plans) • There is an effort to coordinate treatment as offenders transition into the community • Offenders sign a release for therapists to provide information about their treatment to the parole department and to community treatment providers 2 years (estimate) Minimal data is collected by the Illinois Department of Corrections because a majority of the offenders are in private programs Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (refers to parole) Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Yes Mandatory Not available • For offenders convicted of Predatory Criminal Sexual Assault, Aggravated Criminal Sexual Assault, and Criminal Sexual Assault and were convicted on or after December 13, 2005 • The Prisoner Review Board decides on length of parole for these offenders and it can range from 3 years to life See above for parole State-funded Community treatment providers conduct an assessment when an offender enrolls in treatment To assess level of risk, need for treatment, level of service provided Varies by provider Yes Offenders on specialized caseloads have very specific conditions of parole including electronic detention, Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring, residency restrictions, and strict provisions for contact with children 20 cases per officer on average • Officers required to participate in 80 hours of training on sex offender supervision • Provides information on sex offender treatment, community sex offender management strategies, legislation specific to sex offenders, surveillance, victim issues, etc. • Ongoing training is provided after the 80 hours • Duration of parole • Generally 1-3 years, but can extend to lifetime as indicated above Not available • Supervisors work with treatment staff as a part of the department’s containment team model • The department tries to get as many people involved to provide wraparound services for offenders • Maintain data on recidivism • Do not collect any data at the individual level Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 68 Maintenance Evaluation Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 69 Indiana Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • Treatment is available in three correctional facilities: Plainfield Correctional Facility, Miami Correctional Facility, Rockville Correctional Facility (female facility) • All services are provided by Liberty Behavioral Health (LBH)—private contractor that has been providing services to sex offenders since 1999 • Liberty contract covers prison-based and community-based treatment (continuous program) • Other offenders have access to treatment as well, but not in main group program Liberty Behavioral Health has a list of performance indicators in contract with state Liberty Behavioral Health Department of Corrections (DOC) State-funded through DOC Available to all sex offenders Yes (even those not in the country legally) Males and females • Dealt with on an individual basis • If mental illness precludes an individual from receiving treatment, then he/she does not receive it • All others are eligible • Prison-based treatment is mandated by statute: offenders who refuse to participate could receive a discipline report and hearing • If offender is found at hearing to be in violation of disciplinary code, and continues to refuse treatment, he/she could lose earned credit time and have restrictions on visitation 4,000 (estimate) • At any given time, there are 1,000 in treatment at Plainfield, but only 100 in treatment at Miami • Long-term plan is to implement the new program in both prisons so that both can accommodate 1,000 patients at a time • Everyone is seen in some capacity before they are released, but not intensively at one facility 3 (2 male, 1 female) Not available Not available Not available Each provider has group of about 10 offenders (estimate) • 2 months (18 hours per week) • Over the next year, when everyone in facilities gets treatment, duration will be length of stay Varies—sometimes right before release Cognitive-behavioral therapy with relapse prevention, arousal management, interpersonal skills, psychoeducational component No Polygraph Manualized within risk groups (i.e. low risk gets less treatment than high risk) No Not available • 2 levels of providers: Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 70 1. 2. Counselor 1: must be licensed as a mental health provider Counselor 2: not required to be licensed, but must have degree in social work/psychology or sex offender treatment experience • Counselor 1 works with higher risk offenders • Counselor 2 conducts psychoeducation groups and process groups Assessment Purposes Tools Risk assessment and other treatment needs • STATIC-99 used for risk assessment • MSI-II, psychological inventory of criminal thinking styles (PICS) conducted at intake for treatment needs • STABLE occasionally used for risk assessment • STABLE and STATIC actuarial • PICS and MSI have been validated Data and Research Type • LBH has utilization data (i.e. individual is in treatment, individual refused treatment), but not much data on progress • No demographic data (although DOC probably keeps that) Paper and electronic • Liberty Health • Sometimes in department databases • DOC maintains some records Recidivism data on men released into community-based treatment Storage Maintenance Evaluation TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration • Liberty Behavioral Health contracts with the DOC to provide prison and community-based treatment to sex offenders—community treatment is consistent with the parameters of prison treatment • Mandatory for all sex offenders on parole Not available Not available Not available Not available State funded through DOC Not available Currently 700 parolees (estimate) Not applicable Not available 98% (estimate) Not applicable Liberty Behavioral Health subcontracts with providers across the state, who go through credential process to ensure that they meet treatment standards 45-50 (estimate) Statewide 0% Not available Not available Cognitive-behavioral therapy with relapse prevention, arousal management, interpersonal skills, psychoeducational component No Polygraph Manualized within risk groups (i.e. low risk gets less treatment than high risk) Not available Treatment lasts as long as supervision Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 71 Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • LBH has utilization data (i.e. individual is in treatment, individual refused treatment), but not much data on progress • No demographic data (although DOC probably keeps that) Paper and electronic • Liberty Health • Sometimes in department databases • DOC maintains some records Recidivism data on men released into community-based treatment Annual recidivism study examines how many parolees violate or recidivate with new sex crime REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management o Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Yes Yes—Community Transition Program, Work Release, Community Corrections, Parole and Probation Supervision 100% (official statistic, from pre-release reentry programs) Transition From Prison to Community Initiative (TPCI) • Yes—sex offender treatment is mandated and if sex offender refuses then disciplinary action is taken • As part of treatment, offender is required to plan for release—this includes education on residence restriction and registration responsibilities Participation is required for all sex offenders 500 sex offenders within 6 months of release (estimate from Indiana Department of Corrections Planning Division) 725 sex offenders under parole eligible for post-release (estimate from Indiana Department of Corrections Planning Division) Yes Department of Corrections Policy and Statute Director of Reentry and the Indiana Department of Corrections (IDOC) Executive Staff State funded, majority comes through IDOC budget • Indiana Department of Corrections—based on state statute • STATIC-99 is risk indicator Evaluations and assessments begin at intake Education, placement planning, sex offender-specific treatment • Case managers are IDOC employees that are members of the Unit Team Offender Management system used by IDOC • Assigned upon arrival in correctional facility Not available • Parole supervision provided by IDOC, while probation and community corrections provided by courts • Different case managers than those assigned in prison, but unit team will hand off to community supervision team when offender is released to supervision • Parole supervision and containment team (treatment) have access to reentry accountability plan and treatment summary report Post-release supervisors also coordinate services Limited participation Not available Not available • Treatment, polygraph, financial assistance, referral services for employment, housing assistance, medical services, mental health services • While on parole, the offender will be monitored by the containment team, and as Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 72 the offender becomes stable and adjusted in the community fewer services are needed COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (Refers to Parole) Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Yes • Not mandatory for sex offenders to be on parole—function of the sentence imposed by the court • If an offender comes to the DOC with suspended time that offender may not be on parole—due to the probation sentence (suspended time) • If an offender is given a straight executed sentence then he comes to parole—this is the majority of cases • If certain types of sex offenders are released onto parole, they must be supervised in a specialized Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP—see below) • If sex offender is released onto parole for one of the following crimes, must be supervised in SOMP: Rape, Criminal Deviant Conduct, Molesting, Exploitation, Pornography, Sexual Battery, Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, Incest, Public Indecency, Prostitution with a Minor, Failure to Register as a Sex Offender (this list is not exhaustive) • In addition, if released onto parole for non-sexual offense but have history of one of the above offenses, placed on SOMP • If sex offender maxes out in prison, not required to be on post-release supervision Yes—but brand new and only one person on it Parole Not available State Yes Not available All sex offenders released onto parole Low, medium, high Assess risk • STATIC-99 while in institutional facility • Parole uses stable tally sheet within first 30 days of release and once every 6 months, and acute tally done every face-to-face visit (both are mandatory) Yes • More face-to-face visits and collateral contacts • Some are supervised on GPS • More contact between agent and counselor • 46 on specialized caseload in Evansville, but not every office has specialized caseloads • Some sex offenders get placed in regular caseloads, but supervisor must have specialized training • 3-day training • Shadow specialized agent before get own caseload • Yearly continuing education Depends a lot on the initial sentence, but can be supervised for up to ten years if sentence does not prohibit it Sex offenders have access to all services available to general offender population, plus sex offender counseling Yes—with employment agencies and other service agencies • Individual offices maintain own data • Also centralized data repository for the state • Data on risk levels, employment, demographic information, etc. Electronic Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 73 Maintenance Evaluation Parole offices Evansville Parole Office is conducting a GPS study Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 74 Iowa Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Available in 2 facilities • Mount Pleasant houses most of the treatment programs • Department of Corrections (DOC) has just opened a satellite program in another facility—at the moment it is very small as it is brand new Yes Iowa Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) Not available State-funded through the DOC Yes Males and females Yes Mandatory for all sex offenders 1,396 statewide (including 650 in Mount Pleasant) 30% 2 prisons • Standard Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP): 281 beds • Short-term Programming: 25 beds • Spanish Speaking: 15 beds • Special Needs: 63 beds • New Satellite Program: 25 beds (all special needs) Usually 100, but because it is new the Satellite Program currently has no waiting list 0 1:25 14-16 months 24-30 months prior to release Cognitive behavioral therapy with victim empathy, anger management, relationships No Polygraphs used extensively Manualized Yes 35% Not available • Not currently • LSI-R and STATIC-99 are used but they do not drive treatment • The mere fact of having committed a sex offense or that there was a sexual component to an offense determines treatment • Moving towards using tools for dosage etc. Not applicable Not applicable Not available Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON) DOC No TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Yes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 75 Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes • Males and females • There are fewer females so treatment is slightly different—more individual and less group treatment Generally treatment is mandatory but some may be precluded due to physical limitations • There are 8 districts and each runs their own programs (there are similarities and differences) • The 8th district (and some others) use treatment teams • Other districts have community treatment providers and those provides make decisions themselves • State-funded • Each district provides services that the state reimburses them for • 860 (estimate)—mostly probationers • In 2006, there were 856 Not available 100 (estimate) Not applicable • Out of 856 in 2006, 607 (71%) were in treatment • Reasons why someone might be in treatment include disability/mental health, not being on supervision for current sex offense, treatment not required by court Not available Not available Not applicable • DOC runs a lot of programs itself • 15-20 external providers Mostly in urban areas Some offenders are required to travel to attend programs • For DOC programs, no waiting lists, but there may be a wait for counseling services • Information not available for external providers Not available • Not available • Usually people are in treatment the entire time they are on supervision—if they fail to complete, they are returned to prison • Cognitive behavioral therapy-based but currently use a relapse model • Starting to change to a Good Life model • Each district will decide what they want to do • They use a modified National Institute of Corrections (NIC) curriculum • Seldom used • Iowa does have a hormonal treatment law but it is seldom ordered by courts Polygraphs used extensively In most districts, more individualized but there is a standard curriculum that is supposed to be followed Yes Most districts require treatment or maintenance for the entire period of supervision Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON) DOC No REENTRY Availability Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 76 Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • • Supervision Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Yes 4 of 9 facilities Modeled after NIC Transition from Prison to the Community Yes, some Offenders serving life sentences are ineligible Not available Not available Not available No, case management policy DOC DOC State-funded through DOC • Iowa Board of Parole • Criteria: Use own risk assessment and rely on case manager’s progress reports which utilize some combination of LIS-R, RRASOR, and STATIC-99 • Philosophically, at admission • Realistically, focused on a transition period beginning 6 months from release which is when much of the programming/services take place • Treatment program itself • Gradual and structured release—move to minimum security and work release before release to the community Yes, specially trained case managers assigned at admission Specially trained probation and parole officers in each district, different from the ones in prison Yes Yes, written and the same database is used in prison and outside so all those records are available (progress reports, risk assessments, etc.) Some involvement No official number but some are involved • Circles of Support • Mentoring • Continuing Treatment • Polygraph • GPS • Employment • Mental health services if needed • Move people to parole or back to institution if relapse concerns Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON) DOC No COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Yes Mandatory for all sex offenders when ordered by the court Not applicable Yes, for those whose offense is a C Felony or above • Probation : Traditional—399; Interstate Compact—28 • Parole : Traditional—28; Interstate Compact—9 • State Work Release (supervised by Probation/Parole Officer): 10 Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 77 Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • State funding through DOC • Offender supervision fees • Iowa Risk Assessment: started in 1982; modified in 1986 and 1991 • STATIC-99: started in 1999 • LSI-R: started in 2000 All sex offenders Low, Medium and High • Determine amenability for treatment • Evaluate their level of risk to recidivate, both specifically for sexual offending and general recidivism. • Provide treatment and supervision staff with client specific risk/need areas from which to base treatment intervention • Used to assess risk in the psychosexual evaluation: LSI-R, Jesness, STATIC-99, ISORA 8 (currently in the research phase of development), MMPI-2, STABLE 2000 / 2004, ACUTE 2000 / 2004, SVR-20, PCL-R, Marlow Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSDS), Shipley Institute of Living Scale-R, Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test • Used to assess risk during treatment: Polygraph, Penile Plethysmograph, Burt Rape Myths Acceptance Scale, Bumby Cognitive Distortion, Nowicki-Strickland Internal / External Scale, Stages of Change Scale, Abel & Becker Cognitions Scale, Wilson Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire, Carich-Adkerson Victim Empathy & Remorse Self-Report Inventory • Used to assess ongoing levels of risk: Polygraph, STABLE 2000, Pre and Posttest of curriculum material • Own customized tool—ISORA 8 (currently in research/validation phase of development) Series of special conditions including mandatory electronic monitoring 15-30, varies by district • Iowa ATSA certification • Training or knowledge about sex offender specific laws in Iowa 2 years to Life • Group sex offender treatment • Individual treatment, if needed. • Couples therapy, if requested • Family reunification • Psychological testing • Job Club (job seeking services) • Referrals to substance abuse treatment and services • Yes • Agents frequently consult with outside treatment providers, facilitators at group homes and staff at local residential facilities • Agents also often work closely with employers to enable continued treatment without interfering with employment Rates of recidivism and characteristics correlated with recidivism Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON) DOC No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 78 Kansas Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Yes • Department of Corrections offers a grant to program to provide services • One organization provides all services • Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) set standard through application • Department of Corrections can provide the standard • Deputy Secretary of Programs, Research, Support & Staff Development, Department of Corrections • Conducts audits Department of Corrections Only certain sex offenders Yes Males and females Yes Not available 2,700 (estimate) 11% Lansing Correctional Facility, Hutchinson Correctional Facility, Norton Correctional Facility, Topeka Correctional Facility (women’s) Capacity by prison: • Lansing: 140 • Hutchinson: 120 • Norton: 40 • Topeka: 12 100% 100% 1:20 15 months 36 months Cognitive behavior modification, relapse prevention, Good Lives Model No Polygraph, penile plethysmograph, visual reaction time Individualized • Under previous law, offenders are not paroled until they complete treatment • Under current law, offenders can refuse treatment 95% • Master’s Degree or higher in Social Work, Psychology, Marriage/Family Counseling, or counseling certification • Continued review and training required Not available • MMPI, STATIC-99, LSI, Psychological Assessment • No tool specific for the state Demographic, completion rates, termination rate/reason, utilization, recidivism (reconviction or sex offense or return to institution in three years) OMIS (Department of Corrections data system) Department of Corrections Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 79 • Annually by Department of Corrections • Annual Program Review Evaluation TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other CC Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other CC Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Yes Males and females Mandatory Plan is initially made in the institution—then out-patient providers reassess Department of Corrections and offender co-pay 750 (estimate) 40 (estimate) 700 (estimate) 10 (estimate) 75% Not available Not available Not available 1—the Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (has state contract) 13 outpatient offices within 50 miles of all offenders 0% 0% Not available (difficult to measure because offenders undergo contact review and may go in and out of treatment depending on Risk Assessment and Responsivity Rate) Cognitive behavioral modification, relapse prevention, Good Lives Model, risk reduction, successful living plan No Polygraph, penile plethysmograph, visual reaction time Individualized Yes 36 months Demographic, completion (release from treatment), revocation reason, end of sentence TOADS data system Department of Corrections Annual Program Evaluation Report REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release • Available to all offenders • Targeted to those who are high risk and will be entering major urban areas • Pilots sites in Topeka, Wichita, and Kansas City Yes Yes All 8 facilities Working with the National Institution of Corrections, JEHT Foundation, and the Council on State Governments No, program depends on LSI-R score • Eligible: Any inmate who scores high LSI-R score with 1 year to serve • Ineligible: Any inmate who scores in the low to moderate range or any inmate with less than nine months to serve Not available 300 (estimate) Less than 25% of those who score as high risk Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 80 Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • State, JEHT Foundation • National Institute of Corrections provides technical assistance • Sentenced under indeterminate sentencing: Parole Board makes decisions and sets forth criteria • Sentenced under determinate sentencing: determine in statute One year prior to release date Depending on LSI-R score: employment, housing, mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment • Reentry case managers are available in each prison • Assigned to prisoners one year prior to release date • Coordinate with parole officers after release for a minimum of six months Parole officer in coordination with reentry case manager and Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) Not available Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) Yes Not available Assistance-based community services Treatment from Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) Assessment, case management notes TOADS Department of Corrections Yes, but not sex offender-specific COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Yes Mandatory as sentenced Not available Yes, for certain offenders sentenced after July 2007 (defined in statute) Probation, Parole/Post-Release Supervision, and Community Corrections • Parole/Post-Release Supervision: 1,512 (estimate) • Community Corrections: 1,500 • Department of Corrections funds Parole and Community Corrections • Judiciary funds Probation • Classification of offenders in prison is done through a validated classification instrument • Classification of offenders on community supervision is done using the LSI-R • Sex offenders are managed based on diagnostic tools used by treatment provider who shares the recommendations for risk management and community supervision with the supervising parole officer • Probationary supervision is based on order from the court, which may include information from a community provider assessment of the sex offender and recommendations for supervision/risk management • Department of Corrections implemented the LSI-R in 2003 • Community Corrections implemented the LSI-R in 2004 • Probation is slated to implement the LSI-R in 2009 All inmates Low, moderate, high Reassessment of sex offenders occurs whenever there is a change in status/risk level based on behaviors demonstrated by the offender or at regular intervals beginning at intake, six months later and then annually unless changes occur to require a reassessment Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 81 Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • To determine risk and needs • Assist case management LSI-R and Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) tools • Yes, wherever possible • Not in rural areas Not available 35 Team case management, handling behavior, noticing triggers, when to use electronic monitoring • 2 years on average • Supervision terms for post-release from prison are based on sentence • Supervision length may be as long as a lifetime or as short as one year depending on time served and sentence structure Same as regular offenders • Yes, there is a reentry manager Assessment, case notes TOADS Department of Corrections Yes, but not sex offender-specific Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 82 Kentucky Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • • • Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized • In 5 correctional facilities: Kentucky State Reformatory, Luther Luckett Correctional Complex, Western Kentucky Correctional Complex, Kentucky State Penitentiary and the Kentucky Correctional Institute for women • 4 of the above are men’s facilities and 1 is a women’s facility • These are not specialized facilities, they are for the general population Yes • Developed by statute KRS 197.400-440 • Established a specialized sex offender program for state prisons Provided by the Department of Corrections Licensed Psychologist Program Administrator State-funded • Treatment is generally available for all sex offenders • The only sex offenders who are not eligible to receive treatment are those diagnosed with mental retardation and/or offenders with an active psychosis • Lifers or death row inmates may not be eligible because of their length of stay in prison • A person my reject treatment or may not be admitted into treatment if s/he does not admit to committing the sex offense Yes, noncitizens get treatment, but may be deported after serving their sentence Males and females Mentally ill inmates who are treated and are not diagnosed with an active psychosis are eligible for treatment • Not mandatory—individuals can refuse treatment • Treatment is tied to inmates’ good time and seeing the parole board 2,178 at the end of 2007 (estimate) • 20% (at any given point in time) • Eventually almost all sex offenders in prison will at least attempt treatment 5 prisons (listed above) 165 (estimate) Approximately 40-50 people are waiting to get into treatment at anytime 0% 50:1 (as stipulated in statute) 2 years (estimate) Have to be within 4 years of earliest possible release date—this is the reason why lifers and death row inmates may not receive treatment as listed above (estimate) Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention There are two phases of treatment: • During Phase I offenders participate in the following therapy sessions/groups: psychoeducational, family patterns, human sexuality, social skills • During Phase II offenders participate in the following therapy sessions/groups: basic ownership, autobiography, advanced ownership, victim personalization, relapse prevention planning No, drugs are not administered No polygraphs or voice tests are administered • Blend of both individualized and manualized treatment plans • The department has manuals to standardize treatment, but it is trying to shift to more individualized plans Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 83 Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Not required, but participation in treatment is tied to good time and when the offender sees the parole board • If the offender refuses treatment, s/he would serve their full sentence • Post-release registration is tied to the initial conviction and is not influenced by treatment outcome 70% (estimate) • Treatment providers in prison generally have a bachelor’s degree • The Sex Offender Risk Assessment Advisory Board (SORAAB) conducts a training every spring and the department head requires that staff attend the training—but participation in the training is not mandatory based on department regulations or statute • Prior to sentencing, the Sex Offender Risk Assessment Unit, which covers the entire state, conducts a Comprehensive Sex Offender Pre-Sentence Evaluation (CSOPE) which is conducted by psychologists and is done in addition to a regular pre-sentence investigation report • This information is shared with the Department of Corrections Sex Offender Treatment Program • To assess risk • To assess amenability to treatment • STATIC-99, MnSOST, RRASOR, VRAG, PCL-R • Kentucky does not have a customized tool Two separate data systems: demographic and program evaluation Administrative data Not available Not available • Study on the state’s program conducted in 1997 and a follow-up in 2000 that showed the program was effective (Barnes and Peterson) • Above study was included in Hanson’s meta-analysis report in 2002 TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Yes No Males and females • Treatment is mandatory—if offenders do not participate they can be revoked • Stipulated in probation/parole processes statute • Treatment provider is responsible for treatment • Treatment provider and the probation/parole officer are a part of a team and they share information back and forth with each other about each case • State funded • In the past few years the Department of Corrections has started to collect nominal fees ($5/month for indigent offenders and $20/month for non-indigent) from the individuals receiving treatment • 1,200 (estimate) • Above number includes probation and parole but the vast majority are on probation • Very few sex offenders are paroled each year See above Not applicable 35% (estimate) Not applicable Not applicable • 14 state-sponsored providers (official Department of Corrections number) • Above number does not include private providers Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 84 Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Treatment providers are generally available statewide with the exception of two regions No waiting lists for state providers because they would be referred to private providers if they did not have availability 0% 60% (estimate) • Same as prison—only additional components are partner alert sessions where offenders bring a support partner to group • The support partner works with the offender and speaks to any warning signs No Polygraphs Same as in-prison treatment Yes, community providers conduct an assessment of where the offender is at in terms of treatment progress so as not to duplicate what has already been done in prison 30 months (estimate) Two separate data systems: demographic and program evaluation Administrative data Not available Not available • Study on the state’s program conducted in 1997 and a follow-up in 2000 that showed the program was effective (Barnes and Peterson) • Above study was included in Hanson’s meta-analysis report in 2002 REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • • • • There is reentry programming in the state but nothing systematic in place The reentry programming is currently undergoing an extreme evaluation Some pre-release services available—availability depends on the institution In some institutions a veterans’ program comes in and talks about services available to veterans when released from prison • The social security office also speaks to inmates about how to apply for disability, etc. Not available Not available • No specialized sex offender program • There was some emergency assistance funding that was provided for sex offender management services and problems associated with residency restrictions but the money is going to be gone by the end of the summer 2008 Anyone serving in a state institution Not available Not available Not available No state standard for reentry programming Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable—there really is no funding • Parole board is the releasing authority • Criteria not available 3 months prior to release (estimate) Not available • Every inmate has a case manager (not specific to reentry) • State employs pre-release coordinators who run “prison to street” programs Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 85 • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Not available Minimal Some—mostly occurs in more urban parts of the state Not available • Same services that are available for the general offending population • Sex offenders participate in sex offender treatment COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Yes—probation, parole, sex offender conditional discharge • Sex offender conditional discharge means that the offender is released on his/her minimum expiration date and then is supervised in the community for a period of 5 years—during this 5 year period, the offender participates in treatment as well Community supervision is not mandatory if the offender serves the full sentence Not available No Probation, parole, conditional discharge • 1,419 as of March 2008 (official number, Department of Corrections monthly data entry summary) • State pays for community supervision • Sliding scale for treatment • Private programs charge different amounts Yes Not available All offenders • For sex offenders: high, moderate, low • Other offenders: all of the above and administrative level of supervision—sex offenders are generally not at this level • Assessed when community supervision begins • Information from in-prison treatment staff is passed onto community supervision agents Not available Same tool used for sex offenders as other offenders—tool does not have a name but has been validated Yes—it has been in place for 2 years • Higher level of supervision • Smaller caseloads • 65 cases per officer (estimate) • Standard of 35 cases per officer on non-SOISP caseloads, but most caseloads are much higher The state is in the process of getting policies approved for preliminary training and some additional training for officers 4-5 years (estimate) • Sex offender treatment • Referrals made for vocational training and other services Collaboration is a critical element—case managers collaborate with in-prison treatment staff, private providers, state-sponsored providers, etc. • No individual data is stored • The department transferred to a unified case management system about two years ago—still in a state of transition Not available Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 86 Maine Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes • 60 bed Therapeutic Community (only sex offenders in one facility) • It is available to all prisoners but if they are accepted they must be transferred to that facility No Not applicable Department of Corrections (DOC) tries to follow Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) guidelines State-funded through DOC Yes • Males only • There are only 150 females in total incarcerated statewide so not a critical mass of sex offenders Same process as other offenders—offered unless the illness precludes appropriate treatment • Medium custody facility so not available for anyone who is closed custody • If part of case plan, becomes mandatory (after screening and assessment) if they meet custody classification • Not compelled—right to refuse but subject to sanctions if refuse treatment that is mandated in their case plan (e.g. not eligible for community programs, paid jobs, furloughs etc.) 357 (official) 16% (official) 1 60 beds 100% 0% 1:15 48 months 48 months prior to release – try to time it so there is transition to community after program completed • Cognitive behavioral therapy with some victim empathy, biofeedback, arousal control • Use both groups and individual treatment (in tandem) Historically no, but not ruled out Polygraphs Manualized • No, because of determinate sentencing • No impact on classification but might in the future—legislature is looking at it (along with other aspects of sex offender laws and policies) Too early to tell (only in operation for 3 years) • Have to be licensed clinicians • Director is a PhD psychiatrist and the rest have Master’s degrees or higher • No certification required • Attend annual ATSA conferences • Ongoing in-service work Yes Risk, needs and responsivity Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 87 • STATIC 99 • RRASOR • LSI-R A significant amount is collected and/or the provider has been asked to collect • Admissions and terminations • Average number of participants, number of group sessions, number of prisoners dropping out, or refusing treatment, number of readmissions, phase of treatment, number of successful completions • Staffing vacancies, number of aftercare groups conducted, number of releases to community, number of prisoners in transition to community, number of prisoners participating in reentry who were released, number of transition plans submitted to parole officer, number of those returned by parole officer, number of comprehensive assessments • Some individual level factors, number and seriousness of disciplinary reports • Compare intensive phase with pre-program behavior • Number of sex offenders successfully integrated into the community, number of program completers compared with non-completers who re-offend—sex offenses and non-sex offenses Electronic DOC and provider (kept separately) None Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Yes Males and females • Not mandatory—at the court’s discretion • No parole but split sentence with probation (judicial parole) and court decides the conditions of supervision Collaboration between probation/parole officer and treatment and containment team (made up of law enforcement, victims’ services, etc.) • Primarily offender funded • Some federal funding designated for indigents now that childless adults no longer eligible for Medicaid 692 (official) Not applicable Not applicable 95-98% (estimate from probation/parole officers) Not applicable Not applicable 20 (estimate) Available in different regions but there are certain rural areas where services are not available Not available Not available Not available • Varies by program • Some of them are evidence-based with manualized curriculums and cognitive behavioral therapy while others are not • They try to refer to the better programs but that’s not always possible Not to his knowledge Polygraphs Manualized (some) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 88 Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Generally • One of the benefits they have is that the largest community provider is the same company that does the prison-based treatment • Varies—lifetime for some • Some will continue treatment when their probation period ends Not collected—no capacity Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 89 Maryland Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration • Treatment is provided to offenders in the community, but there is little that the state pays for and provides • When a court order requires an individual to get treatment, it is the responsibility of the probation/parole agent or the individual to find the appropriate treatment/resource Not sure Males and females • Determined by judge or parole board • Both the judge and the parole board can add specific stipulations about treatment • Treatment plans are conducted by the treatment provider • The state does not tell providers how to do the work • Majority of treatment is paid for by the individual • The state funds one small out-patient program—the Special Offender Clinic that is now 27 years old and was originally focused on domestic violence 1,000-1,500—accounts for both parole and probation (estimate) See above Not applicable 20%--accounts for both parole and probation (estimate) See above Not applicable 50 • Treatment available throughout the state but more concentrated in certain areas • 12-15 (of the 23 counties in the state) have at least one provider (estimate) Baltimore county may have a waiting list but in other places it is unlikely 0% 65% (not an average of all programs throughout the state) Relapse prevention, victim empathy, healthy sexuality • Only one program in the state administers anti-androgen medications • If patients are in need of medication, they are referred to the above provider for a prescription No Combination of individualized and manualized plans Very little treatment is available in prison so there is practically nothing to match • 1-2 years for adults (estimate) • 2 years for adolescents (estimate) COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Yes—probation and parole • Judges and parole commissioners • Legislative stipulations Not available No Probation and parole (consolidated under the Division of Parole and Probation) • Parole: 97 • Probation: 1,325 • Other: 519 (probation before judgment, pretrial, etc.) • All above are official Division of Parole and Probation numbers Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 90 Funding Assessment Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration • State funded • Offender pays a fee • The Sex Offender Screening and Risk Assessment (SOSRA) agency was created when the state passed legislation in 1997 that mandated community notification • The Division of Community Corrections conducts a risk/needs assessment when offenders are sentenced or released to community supervision. The same tool is used for all sex offenders and is not specific to the sex offender population 2007 Not available • Levels 1, 2, 3 (1 and 2 intensive) 3 is intermediate • Specific to sex offenders • To provide information on when to enhance treatment and supervision • Determine risk • STATIC-99 for the first 30 days • ACUTE completed every 90 days thereafter Yes Enhanced supervision 57 (estimate) Undergo training in the Collaborative Offender Management and Enforced Treatment 35 months (estimate) • Sex offender treatment, drug treatment, education/GED, job placement, mental health treatment • Refer sex offenders for transitional housing • Yes—there is team called COMET that follows the containment model • Team includes parole/probation agents, supervisors, state’s attorney, Baltimore City Police Department Sex Offender Unit and treatment providers—soon to include polygraphers as well Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 91 Massachusetts Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs REENTRY (Refers to state-level practices) Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management o Supervision o Service coordination Nonprofit involvement o Faith-based o Role Services available • Reentry services involve the Department of Corrections (DOC), parole, and local jails • DOC and parole initiatives are coordinated at the state level • Practices vary at the local level—different sheriff agencies do different things Yes Yes—8 reentry centers focused in urban areas 100%--every state facility has reentry programming Parole initiative is “Regional Reentry Centers” Yes—Intensive Parole for Sex Offenders (IPSO) • Everyone who discharges from state prison is offered the services of a reentry center (except for those discharged with probation only and youths)—but this is voluntary, not required • Reentry centers target state offenders with no supervision ties, county offenders with no supervision ties, and offenders coming out on parole • Sex offenders are not eligible for transitional housing services Not available Not available Two independent state standards (DOC/parole)—but they are coordinated Individually developed, but each agency participates in the other’s process Executive Office of Public Safety • Primarily state-funded, but supplemented by grants • In 2004, MA received funding from VOTIS (Violent Offender Truth in Sentencing) and SVORI (Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative) Mainly provided by DOC, except for employment portfolio • Parole Board (all members appointed by Governor); • Decisions based on 2 criteria: 1. Is release compatible with community safety? 2. What is the risk for recidivism? (in process of validating COMPAS for Massachusetts) 6 months prior to release or time permitting • Employment portfolio • Discharge planning based on individual needs • Must have approved home plan and approved work plan before release • Team approach • Parole and DOC case managers Parole officers and probation officers (or both) Parole officers and probation officers (or both) • Information exchange between DOC and parole • Parole officers play a role in service coordination as well Yes Involved in service delivery for sex offenders, but do not comprise a large proportion of service providers for sex offenders Service delivery—housing, transportation • Reentry centers are not residential—just day treatment • Two reentry officers in each center • Services include employment assistance (including portfolio development), vocational, substance abuse, mental health, transportation, child support mediation sessions, help obtaining state identification) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 92 • Housing program does not serve sex offenders though • If reentry centers cannot provide services, give referrals to other community organizations Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Demographics, offenses, recidivism, substance abuse, mental health, housing sustainability Electronic Parole—has many university partners as well IPSO mandated evaluation Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 93 Michigan Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation On probation and parole Yes, if not being deported Males and females • For probationers, dependent on whether judge orders it (rare for judge not to order it) • Mandatory for parolees • Yearlong treatment is required by state standard • Must do assessment—treatment is individualized to an extent within the template • Department of Corrections (DOC) funding • Co-pay system whereby offender pays portion—this is a sliding scale where offenders pay based on their income Approximately 3,000 (rough estimate) 950 Not applicable All sex offenders will be in treatment at some point, but it may not be funded by DOC All sex offenders on parole required to attend treatment Not applicable All locally-based 65 Less availability in rural areas because do not have much of a sex offender population or providers in these areas No waiting due to lack of funding Not available 77% of parolees (official statistic but dated) 68% of probationers (official statistic but dated) Relapse prevention, cognitive-behavioral therapy No chemicals or drugs • Polygraph exams are used in Detroit, Kalamazoo, Muskegon, and Flint—but not statewide • Primarily maintenance exams • Individualized within the state template • All must develop relapse prevention plan, identify triggers and thinking errors, etc. Community treatment is consistent with prison-based treatment and meant to pick up where prison treatment left off At least a year Beginning in October 2008, the state will develop a systematic model of data collection Not available Not available Not available • No studies on treatment, but there has been a polygraph study that has not yet been released • Study is a randomized design and found that the polygraph did not deter new offenses REENTRY Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 94 Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services • Reentry efforts began in 2003 • Culminated in Michigan Prisoner Reentry Initiative (MPRI)—an interdepartmental collaboration • Reentry is statewide but not fully implemented for all three phases, which means that percentages and numbers will increase gradually over time • Once the initiative is up to scale, every prisoner will be in MPRI from the point of reception to prison • Content of programming will vary by risk level—goal is a system that is responsive to individuals Yes—particularly in in-reach facilities, which house moderate and high-risk offenders Yes • 14 in-reach facilities out of 48 prisons • Transition 60% of returning prisoner population • MPRI—3 phase process: 1. Phase I: Lasts until positive parole decision—this is when assessments are done 2. Phase II: Transferred to special facility before release to develop unified case plan 3. Phase III: Release • Parole Board decides who is moderate to high risk and thus eligible for in-reach • Once in in-reach, get assessment by COMPAS (eventually COMPAS will be used to assess risk level) Yes—sex offender treatment (6 month cognitive-behavioral therapy mandatory for all sex offenders) About half of sex offenders in prison are eligible for sex offender programming (the rest are too far removed or already had it) • At any given time, at least 750 sex offenders are in formal treatment • Can simultaneously be involved in other training as well Almost all offenders under supervision are in treatment Minimum standards for MPRI—built in as conditions of funding Not Available Planning Community Development Administration and Correctional Facilities Administration Phase I being launched with women’s program first • Parole Board (part of DOC) is releasing authority • Decisions informed by Michigan Parole Guidelines instrument—not developed as risk instrument, but has been validated against recidivism criteria o Sorts into low, average, and high probability of parole. • Rest of decision based on case review and interview • In process of incorporating COMPAS into release decisions Transferred to in-reach prison 60 days prior to release • Cognitive-behavioral therapy, and other services as needed • Special program for youths adjudicated as juveniles (will be able to do Phase I/Phase II) • Launching new program for offenders with medical illness • Assistant Resident Unit Supervisors manage cases during Phase I • Institutional Parole agents manage cases during Phase II (in-reach facilities) • Phase III delivered upon release onto parole; $33 million for reentry • MPRI not domain-specific—funds can be used for anything • CASOM being piloted in Kalamazoo County Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 95 Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • • Faith-based Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Available for duration of parole—especially MPRI • If there is an ongoing need for services, offenders are referred to agencies that can provide care (typical parole term is 2 years) • Collaborative case management team—cross-training for case managers and community providers • Parole agent is lead case manager • Reentry steering committees also exist at the county or multi-county level • Case management review at least every 6 months Specialized caseloads for sex offenders Not Available • 18 administrative agencies administer funds to local jurisdictions • Selection is based on how closely practices conform to evidence-based practices • Nonprofits provide most services (very few state-sponsored services) 25% (estimate) • Service delivery • Also involved in policy—faith-based providers sit on reentry steering committees • Phase III delivered upon release onto parole • Services provided as needed through contracts with local agencies • Working to standardize treatment • There will be a Corrections Program Checklist beginning in 2009 • CMIS is the current system—only picks people up when they go to prison • All data will be moved to OMNI—which begins at court disposition • OMNI is the primary data base for the Department—contains everything in CMIS and additional data • Data available include comprehensive criminal histories, behavioral misconduct, training, educational assessment, MMPI, demographics, family background, release date, parole decisions, performance Electronic DOC maintains OMNI and CMIS Used for tracking but have not done evaluations due to lack of resources COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding • • • • Available but not mandatory Supervision under consolidated probation and parole administration Determined by judges Mandatory incarceration for Criminal Sexual Conduct in 2nd Degree, and Criminal Sexual Conduct in 3rd degree • No mandatory post-release supervision for sex offenders • Amendment just passed to Michigan Compiled Law (MCL) 771.2a.—offenders convicted of certain listed offenses must be on probation for a minimum of 5 years • Also recent legislation that requires, for offenses committed on or after August 28, 2006, lifetime electronic monitoring of paroled or discharged sex offenders who are sentenced to prison for MCL 750.520b, Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) in the first degree, or MCL 750.520c(1)(a), CSC in the sentencing degree (including conspiracy) • Under this new legislation, lifetime electronic monitoring is also required for individuals convicted for MCL 750.520c, CSC in the third degree, if the offender was 17 years of age or older and the victim was less than 13 years of age at the time of offense (including conspiracy) Probation and Parole (consolidated) 5,004 probationers and parolees serving on sex offense or with a history of sexual offending (official statistic from month-end report in 2005) General state funds through DOC Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 96 Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • No sex-offender specific tools to classify sex offenders into risk level—but Probation and Parole has grant from Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) to pilot VASOR in one county • Currently use COMPAS (but no sex offender-specific tool) • 1970s • Sex offender-specific tools being piloted now Referrals and assessments Sex offenders automatically go to maximum supervision, regardless of what risk assessment tools show Determine supervision level • VASOR, COMPASS, STATIC-99 • Polygraph used for initial community supervision assessment, history, compliance/maintenance • Yes—if there are enough sex offenders in an area to make up a caseload (mostly urban areas) • In smaller rural areas, there are specialized caseloads, but they contain a mix of sex offenders and other offenders • GPS, electronic monitoring on parole • Polygraph used in three counties that cover a substantial portion of the supervision population 35+ for specialized sex offender caseloads • Polygraph examiners go through special training for sex offenders • Supervision agents are selected for specialized caseloads based on interest— receive additional training and GPS training Depends on sentence (determined by judge and Parole Board) • Treatment, but not much else—depends on the area • MPRI forms collaborative groups with communities—work with parolees to address criminogenic needs Referrals to services, but restrictions on housing make it difficult to provide assistance OMNI is statewide system Not available Not available Not available • Study on polygraph and group treatment will be completed in September 2008— examines effect of these combined services on violation behavior • Also piloting VASOR in Probation and Parole—funded through Center for Sex Offender Management Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 97 Missouri Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation State law mandates treatment in the prison New provider Department of Corrections (DOC) State funded through DOC Not available Males and females Yes State law mandates treatment in the prison Not available Not available • 3 (2 male, 1 female) • Farmington has the largest portion of sex offenders: Missouri Sex Offender Program (MOSOP) • Vendalia: Women’s Eastern Reception Center • Bontair Facility: Eastern Reception Not available 100% 0% Not available MOSOP—9 months to 1 year 18 months before release date No No Manualized Yes Not available Not available Yes—but no customized tool Risk assessment, identify level of deviancy and victim preference STATIC 99, Hair Psychopathy, Abel Screen Not available Not available Not available Not available TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Yes Males and females Mandatory for all sex offenders Containment model—therapist and parole officer work together Mainly the sex offenders themselves Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 98 Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not available Not available 95% (estimate)—varies statewide As above As above 56 that have been approved by the DOC • Concentrated in metropolitan areas • Many in St. Louis—fewer in rural areas None (estimate) Not available Not available Cognitive behavioral therapy No Polygraphs More individualized Yes, community therapists have access to MOSOP records in prison 3-4 years, but sometimes up to five years (estimate) Not available Not available Not available Not available REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Yes—many services • In some areas • Kansas City and St. Louis initiatives • There is a lot of partnering with faith-based organizations • 11 of 20 institutions currently have it (low and medium security) • Moving towards expanding to all institutions • Since 2004, reentry has been done by the DOC • With an inter-agency team, the DOC tailored the National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community Initiative model to Missouri’s needs • Governor signed Executive Order in 2006 making the team permanent—with charge of integrating practices and principles across state government • Currently called Missouri Reentry Process (MRP) No, can only access same reentry services as other offenders All sex offenders Not available Not available Not available DOC and some outside contractors developed core programming State MRP Steering Team – state agencies, community providers, ex-offenders, law enforcement, etc. DOC funds pre-release programming • Parole Board • Decisions based on pre-release plans, victims issues, Missouri DOC risk/needs scale • Move into transitional phase six months prior to release–usually relocated to transitional housing unit/wing Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 99 Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • When services expanded to all institutions, higher security inmates will be offered services too (currently no access to transitional units) Transition planning in the areas of employment, soft and hard skills, parenting, cognitive skills, etc. • Case manager assigned when person begins prison sentence • Assigned a new case manager and team when he/she moves into transitional stage No specific post-release programs Parole officers Parole officer is under DOC so receive a lot of information from prison case managers—including Transitional Accountability Plan • In the last five years, they have really become increasingly involved • Currently substantially involved High level of involvement from faith-based organizations (estimate) Direct services including mentoring, some case management, housing, etc. • No services funded by DOC • One project in St Louis that provides services to those who complete sentence without any post-release supervision Data on all offenders including return rates, etc. Electronic DOC • No—but may be developing a report card with outcomes • Sex offenders will be one category in the report card COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Yes Mandatory for all sex offenders Yes – for a specific population that will be coming out on parole (all are still incarcerated) Probation and parole Not available • Intervention fee paid by all those supervised including sex offenders • Also DOC funding • Risk system was developed at least 19 years ago • Needs system has been updated more recently All sex offenders Minimum, regular, enhanced—sex offenders always regular level or higher Dangerous Felons classification as well—includes some sex offenders (sodomy, forcible rape) Risk assessment • STATIC-99 for offenders going through Sentencing Assessment Report • Providers use own assessment tools for those in treatment • In many areas • Not in some of the rural areas because not feasible 45 maximum • DOC is currently developing journeyman training—based on typology, etc. • Quarterly meetings between officers and providers • Encourage and support any outside trainings on sex offenders • 5 years for probation Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 100 Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Not available for parole Electronic Monitoring, GPS, Community Supervision Centers, Residential Center, mandatory treatment, family groups Yes—important component of Missouri supervision Not available Not available Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 101 Montana Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance • Available in Montana state prison • No treatment in regional prisons Yes Montana State Offender Treatment Association (MSOTA) Montana State Offender Treatment Association (MSOTA) Montana Department of Corrections Yes, although most are deported before treatment commences • Mostly males • Fewer than 10 female sex offenders in Montana Women’s Prison Participate in a special needs sex offender group • Available for all sex offenders • Mandatory for all sex offenders to complete Phase I (16 week educational group) 580 (official) Not available 1—Montana State Prison Not available Not available Not available 1:7-8 Phase I: 16 weeks Phase II: open-ended (usually 15 to 30 months) Prioritized by earliest potential release dates Not available No—drugs are only available 2 weeks before leaving treatment 32 polygraphs per year under contract Both—therapist tailors treatment to individual needs • Yes—for releases onto probation and parole • Completion of program not always a factor in post-release classification—Parole board decides using risk instruments • 30% of entries • About 50 per year complete Phase II • 90% of those in Phase I are required to complete Phase II (estimate) • Must be licensed by Montana State Offender Treatment Association • Must have master’s degree in social work, psychology, or counseling and appropriate state license to perform mental health therapy • Must complete 2,000 hours of supervised experience in evaluation and treatment of a sex offender • Must pass written and oral exams and submit work samples reviewed by membership committee • Assess risk • Community notification Static-99, MnSOST-R Completion of treatment, reincarceration, etc Electronic Department of Corrections Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 102 Evaluation Treatment evaluations COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Males and females • Not mandatory but majority go into community treatment • If an individual goes through Phase I, II, and III in prison treatment, may not need community treatment Developed by treatment provider and probation officer Offender 621 (official as of 3/20/08) 93 (official as of 3/20/08) 2 on Department of Corrections Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) (official as of 3/20/08) 15 active licensed providers Statewide 0% 0% Not available • Cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal therapy, etc • No set treatment modality Available but rarely used Montana Sex Offender Treatment Association requires all sex offenders do polygraph once every 12 months Both Yes—treatment providers usually receive information on treatment in prison from the institution 8 months to 4 years Demographics, etc Electronic Montana Department of Corrections No formal studies REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Yes Yes 100% No No All sex offenders are eligible Not available Not available No Not applicable Not applicable Department of Corrections • Parole Board • Decisions based on offender’s compliance with court conditions (treatment, GED, chemical dependency treatment, etc) and assessment tools (MnSOST-R, STATIC- Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 103 Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation 99) • Preparation starts at intake • Most services begin upon release • 2 pre-release centers accept sex offenders • Private centers are similar to regular prerelease Probation officers in prison help with transition (about 90 days prior to release) • Probation officers—not same as prison case manager • Probation officers receive information on risk level, treatment completed in prison, treatment needs in community • Post-release supervisors coordinate services for sex offenders • Some work closely with sex offender therapists in community, but varies by location Yes Majority are not faith-based Not available Services available, but for a limited time Not available Not available Not available Not available COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Yes Not mandatory Sex offenders under parole, probation or conditional release are supervised Yes—for sex offenders who qualify under state statute MCA 45-5-503 (4)(b) and 455-507 (5) (b) • Probation: 621 (official as of 3/20/08) • Parole: 93 (official as of 3/20/08) • Other: 2 on Department of Corrections Intensive Supervision Probation, (official as of 3/20/08) Montana State Legislature Tier-level system enacted by Montana Legislature in 1997 All offenders required to register • Tier 1 (low risk) • Tier 2 (moderate risk) • Tier 3 (high risk or sexually violent predator) • To determine appropriate supervision level and to assist supervising officer in identifying needs • Sex offenders reassessed every 6 months • Standard risk/needs assessment developed by Department of Corrections • Not sex-offender specific tool • Same tools used by parole and probation Yes • Officers receive additional training • Work with treatment providers, law enforcement, family members, and employers to ensure more appropriate supervision for offender Should be 40, but can be higher in certain areas of state Officers encouraged to attend specialized training for sex offender supervision Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 104 Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Varies • Most sex offenders required to attend sex offender treatment or aftercare in community • Employment and housing assistance Case managers encouraged to work with treatment providers, employers, law enforcement officials, family members, and anyone involved with sex offenders in community Demographics Electronic Montana Department of Corrections No formal studies Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 105 New Hampshire Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Available only in specialized facilities for sex offenders No Not applicable Not applicable State Yes Males and females Yes, but not required • Not mandatory for all sex offenders, but they are unlikely to be paroled if they do not complete recommended form of treatment • Determined through actuarial risk assessments, court/sentencing recommendations 737 (estimate) 15% 2 • 72 in intensive treatment • 12 in cognitive-behavioral therapy • 12 in relapse prevention • 3 in female facility 50% (estimate) 0% (official) 1:22 • About 18 months for intensive treatment • 6 months for cognitive-behavioral therapy • Female group and relapse prevention are open-ended Approximately 24 months prior to release date Process-oriented groups, psychoeducational groups, cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, victim empathy training, arousal control, social skills training, sexual education/awareness, individualized treatment planning Only medication for mental health issues available Polygraphs Individualized • No, but individuals who do not complete treatment are unlikely to be paroled • Not a factor in post-release classification Not available • Masters degree and 2 years post graduate experience • Sex offender-specific training and experience Assess risk level, treatment planning, assess individual needs Clinical interview, actuarial risk assessment, dynamic risk assessment, STATIC-99, TNPS, VASOR (Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender Risk) Not available Not available Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 106 COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Males and females • Not mandatory for all sex offenders • Court or Parole Board order or Parole/Probation Officer makes decisions Treatment providers decides treatment plan—sometimes with input of parole/probation officers Offender 597 total (estimate) Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Polygraphs Both Depends on treatment provider Not available Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • • Supervision Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Yes Yes 100% No No All releasing offenders have access to case counselors/case managers to assist with release plans Not available Not available • Parole Board • Release decisions based on institutional behavior, program completion, risk to public, minimum parole date 2 months prior to release date Access to same services as other offenders Case managers assigned based on housing unit • Probation/parole Officers supervise sex offenders in reentry programs after release from prison Probation/parole officer Probation/parole officer receives information regarding housing, employment, education, program requirements Yes, but limited Not available Some provide transitional living arrangements (28-day programs) Services available until the maximum sentence date Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 107 Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Not mandatory Judge or Parole Board decides Yes—for those convicted of aggravated felonious sexual assault with victim under 13 years of age 597 total State To ascertain level of supervision and to develop a case plan • LSI-R, RRASOR • Same tools used by parole and probation No Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable • Varies by offense classification (misdemeanor or felony) • 2 years average for misdemeanor • 5 years average for felony • May be longer for parolees Outpatient sex offender treatment Yes—probation/parole officers make referrals for treatment, monitor progress in treatment, and exchange information with treatment providers Demographic, physical, offense, sentencing, supervisory notes, status Electronic New Hampshire Department of Corrections No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 108 New Jersey Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Treatment provided in Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center—accepts only compulsive and repetitive sex offenders No Not applicable Not applicable • Department of Corrections • Subcontracts Yes Males and females Available but not required Available for all sex offenders as long as they are amenable, willing, compulsive, and repetitive 685 (official) Not available • 1 sex offender facility for males • Another facility that treats female sex offenders (Edna Mahan Correctional Facility) Not available 0% 0% 1:40 (estimate) Varies (several months to several decades) Intake Integrated treatment model includes relapse prevention, cognitive-behavioral therapy, victim empathy, social skills, arousal reconditioning, therapeutic community • Some on anti-androgens • Small number on SSRIs None Individualized No Not applicable • Master’s degree or higher in psychology or Master’s degree in social work • No certification required • Continued training for social workers For sentencing • Personality Assessment Inventory, House-Tree-Person, Shipley Institute of Living Scale • No customized state tool Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 109 North Carolina Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation One prison-based program No Not applicable Not applicable Department of Corrections Yes Males only Not required, but can attend if they are stable Optional and voluntary for those who admit to sex offense 4,743 as of 2/29/08 (official) Not available 1 56 per year (official) 100% (about 250 individuals on waiting list) None 1:8 (official) 5 months Varies Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, arousal control, behavior modification, empathy training, skill building No No Both Not available 95% of eligible offenders completed (official) • No certification, but standards • Must be licensed in North Carolina • Therapists must be able to do group therapy, work with inmates, and be willing to train in sex offender specific treatment for several years To provide background information and devise individual treatment plans • STATIC-99, MSI • State-developed tool: A Personal History Inventory (instrument used to gather information and guide an interview) Test results Paper and electronic Sexual Offender Accountability and Responsibility (SOAR) program No Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 110 North Dakota Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Assessment Purposes Tools Not available MnSOST-R and STATIC-99 were validated on the prison and probation populations in 2003 TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list • Human Service Centers (under Department of Health and Human Services) treat low and moderate risk offenders • Rule-CPC program (under Department of Human Services) treats high risk offenders • Provided through contract with Massachusetts counseling business Yes—unless deported Available for males, but not much available for females • Not mandatory—must be court-ordered or have conditions of supervision amended • Probation—probation officers will usually recommend that sex offender conditions be imposed during pre-sentence investigation, but judges do not have to abide by it • Parole—parolees must participate in sex offender treatment program, but most sex offenders in prison are not paroled • Therapist makes individualized treatment plan in conjunction with probation officer • The Stable and LSI-R are reassessed every 6 months. The ACUTE is completed on a monthly basis • Stable factors reassessed every 6 months • Treatment provided by the Human Service Centers is funded by the State • Offenders are charged on a sliding fee scale • Rule-CPC funded through a grant provided to the Department of Human Services • No charge for offenders participating in Rule-CPC programming 350 (estimate) Less than 10—most sex offenders are not paroled • Community Service Agencies in the state may supervise misdemeanor cases • One Community Service Agency has 5 or fewer misdemeanor sex offenders on their caseload 50 (estimate) Not available • More than 50 high risk sex offenders and/or those with adult victims involved in treatment with Rule-CPC • Number of sex offenders involved in treatment programs through the regional human service centers not available • 5 human service regions provide treatment to all sex offenders except for high risk offender and those with adult victims • Rule-CPC: 5 locations in North Dakota with local therapists In most populated areas: • Human Service Centers—Fargo, Bismarck, Dickinson, Minot, Grand Forks • Rule-CPC—Fargo, Jamestown, Bismarck, Minot, Grand Forks • No waiting list for Rule-CPC Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 111 Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Probably short waiting list for Human Service Centers Not available • Only a few offenders in Rule-CPC have been revoked • Human Service Centers—completion rate not available • Rule-CPC includes cognitive-behavioral therapy, educational program, relapse prevention, victim empathy • Human Service Centers include cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention • Also an educational program in at least one Human Service Center for sex offenders who do not need intensive outpatient treatment No, but will be available soon • Human Service Centers use polygraphs • Rule-CPC uses polygraphs and plethysmographs Individualized • Most sex offenders in prison do not receive parole • If an offender was in a prison treatment program, he/she is often referred to the Human Service Center for follow-up treatment • Community and prison treatment are more similar than dissimilar At least a couple of years Number of referrals, number involved in treatment programming, treatment progress, demographics Electronic and paper Rule-CPC and Human Service Centers • Too soon to evaluate Rule-CPC • Individual Human Service Centers may be doing own evaluations COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Yes Very few sex offenders are paroled Not available No Probation and parole • Very few sex offenders on parole • 350 on probation (estimate) State Implemented in 1990’s All sex offenders • Low, moderate, and high risk • Risk is determined by the SORAC committee (reports to Attorney General) • Parole/probation officers use the MnSOST-R, STATIC 99 to determine risk levels. They also use the Stable and ACUTE to assess risk and implement a case supervision plan to address the areas of risk. • Treatment and programming decisions, community notification, level of supervision, placement on GPS, etc • SORAC committee has overwrite authority on assessment scores • MnSOST-R, STATIC 99, Stable, ACUTE, LSI-R • Stable and LSI-R administered every 6 months • ACUTE administered every month • 7 sex offender specialists who only supervise sex offenders • In rural areas, one officer is assigned to have all sex offenders on caseload, but majority of caseload is non-sex offender • 20 specialized sex offender conditions in addition to 25 general conditions • Sex offender conditions include no contact with minors, no loitering, etc Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 112 Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation 30-40 Training (minimum of 800 hours) and 5 years experience in field Varies Treatment, vocational training, chemical dependency treatment, psychiatric services, employment through job services • Yes—between case managers and HSC • Also Sex Offender Containment Task Forces in Fargo, Jamestown, Bismarck, Minot, and Grand Forks • Task forces were originally set up by the DOCR to determine which sex offenders would need to be placed on GPS but they now play a role in systemic decisions and information sharing • Task forces usually include representatives from law enforcement, parole/probation officers, state attorney, victim advocates, treatment providers, social services, etc Demographic, court orders Electronic • Probation, Courts, and Department of Corrections have different systems • Also centralized data system • DOCSTARS • CPAI (Correctional Programs Assessment Inventory) • No evaluations of sex offender treatment programs in the community Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 113 Oklahoma Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Available No Not applicable Not applicable State funding through Department of Corrections Deportable detainees not prioritized because of limited slots Males and females • Not mandatory but could be sentenced with stipulation that if treatment is completed ,he/she can be released onto probation early • Program at medium male facility for developmentally disabled mentally ill • Intermediate Mental Health Unit for those who are severely mentally ill—focuses on stabilizing mental health Voluntary 3,500 (estimate) 3% 4 facilities (2 male, 2 female) • Males: 80 • Females: 10 100% 0% • Male facilities: 1:20 or 1:40 depending on facility • Female facilities: 1:10 • Males: 12-16 months • Females: not available 12-16 months prior to release date Cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal control, relapse prevention, contingency planning, role plays, victim empathy (limited) No Polygraphs Manualized No 25% (estimate) All staff, including community corrections staff, must be Licensed Professional Counselors, Licensed Behavioral Practitioners, Licensed Clinical Social Workers • Assess risk, develop case plans, and monitor treatment progress (assessment starts in local jails before sending individuals to prison) • Once in sex offender program, tools also inform treatment planning • Psycho-social assessments, LSI-R, STATIC-99, Buss-Durkee, arousal checklists • Collect information within programs on instruments to assess progress in treatment • Department of Corrections collects program participation data (i.e., what kind of treatment, when completed, what type of termination, etc), and demographics Electronic Department of Corrections Survival analysis after release into community (both general offenders and sex offenders) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 114 REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Yes Yes 100% have at least some pre-release services No Specialized caseloads that work with other service providers and groups All sex offenders Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Ensure that all inmates have identification, Medicaid, employment services Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 115 Oregon Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Not available 4,165 (official as of 3/08) Not available COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Males and females Not available Parole officers, Parole Board, Local Supervisory Authority decide on plans State and mostly offender 4,322 (official as of 11/07) Not available Not available Not available 99%, since treatment is ongoing Not available Not available Not available Numerous Statewide Not available Not available Not available—for each individual, completion occurs when supervision expires Containment approach—partnership between parole officer, therapist, and polygraphist • Piloting Depo Provera, but very rarely used • SSRIs are more commonly used Polygraph testing is mandatory for every offender every 6 months and more often if issues arise Not available Not applicable (no prison-based program) 5 years Any data that is needed can be extracted Electronic Prison and community corrections share the same system Evaluations of recidivism, success, etc REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Yes Yes Not available Yes—National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community (TPC) Initiative Yes Sex offenders with a score of 6 or higher on STATIC-99 are eligible for reentry Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 116 Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation services Approximately 60 Not available Not available Yes Not available National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community Department of Corrections and Community Corrections agencies Determinate and indeterminate sentencing At least 6 months prior to release date Not available Yes • Parole officer—not prison case manager • Exchange of information between managers Not available Not available Yes Not available Not available Not available Housing, employment, education, release plan, program entry, participation in cognitive programs, participation in alcohol/drug programs, program completion, supervision completion Not available Oregon Department of Corrections Not available COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Yes Community supervision is mandatory Not available Yes—for offenders classified as sexually violent and dangerous Not available Not available Combination of state, local, levy, and offender funds (varies by county) • Use of Stable/ACUTE tools began on 12/1/07 • Use of STATIC-99 began in 2004 Individuals sentenced for Sodomy I, Sex Abuse I, Rape I, Unlawful Sexual Penetration (any degrees or attempts), Public Indecency, Private Indecency, and OnLine Corruption of a Child Not available Not available • Stable/ACUTE sex offender assessment tool and STATIC-99 • Same tools used by parole and probation Yes, generally • Specialized training for officers • Membership and participation in the Sex Offender Supervision Network, which establishes statewide protocol—comprised of sex offender parole officers, therapists, institution counselors, etc Varies, but mostly below 60 (estimate) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 117 Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not available • 5-6 years for probation (official) • 3 years for post-prison supervision (official) Probation, parole, and post-prison supervision Yes Not available Not available Not available Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 118 Pennsylvania Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • Available in all prison facilities excluding boot camp (26 total) No Not applicable Department of Corrections standard for programming State Yes Males and females • Treatment program depends on level of functioning • Special needs programming available for impaired offenders (including those with mental retardation and other disabilities) • Available to all sex offenders, including those with special needs • Offenders placed in treatment based on willingness to participate • Prioritize individuals who are closest to minimum expiration date • About 14% of population (6,000) is serving time for a sex offense (estimate) • At any given time 5,995-6,015 with a current sex offense (official) • When factor in offenders with prior sex offenses, about 20% are sex offenders (estimate) • About 35-40% of sex offenders choose not to participate (usually those with short sentences) • At any given time, 20% in treatment All (26) • Varies by risk level of program • Approximately 100 per program (1100 total at any given time) Not available Not available 1:300 (including non-sex offenders) • Low risk: 9 months • Moderate-high risk: 27 months • Therapeutic community: 1 year Standard is to start the number of months that program lasts before earliest release date • Use Medlin model • 7 modules total—grounded in cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal control, relapse prevention, etc • Offender accumulates points based on quality of participation • 2 levels of programming—one for moderate-high risk, one for low risk • All 7 modules for moderate-high risk • 3 modules for low risk No No Manualized, although moving toward individualized in therapeutic communities Treatment required for parole 50% • Programming run by psychological services staff • No certification required, but training program must be completed within 6 months of start Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 119 Assessment Purposes • Get baseline risk with STATIC-99 • May adjust level depending on other risk factors not included in STATIC-99 STATIC-99 Tools Data and Research Type • Tracks treatment participation, who is on waiting list, and who has refused treatment • Includes demographics, criminal history Not applicable Not applicable Not yet Storage Maintenance Evaluation TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Not available Males and females • Mandatory in some counties but not others • Criteria for eligibility also varies by county • All sex offenders referred for evaluation at state level and treatment if indicated by evaluation • Only state standards for treatment of sexually violent predators—set out by Sex Offender Assessment Board (SOAB) • Sexually violent predators required to attend treatment once a month for life • SOAB standards call for collaborative effort between providers and case managers • Aside from treatment for sexually violent predators, practices vary by county • Mostly offender • Some system-funded programs The information below reflects only SOAB-approved programs for sexually violent predators • 25 providers approved by SOAB; some have programs in multiple counties, but SOAB has not approved providers in all 67 counties • Other providers treat sex offenders who are not sexually violent predators, but SOAB is not authorized to audit these providers Statewide 1 provider with waiting list Not available Not available This information reflects only SOAB-approved programs • All providers approved by SOAB use cognitive-behavioral therapy (standards apply to both state and county supervision) • Most have psychoeducational component and group modality • 2-3 SOAB-approved programs have psychiatrists on staff so no need to collaborate with anyone for medication administration Yes, may be part of the program Polygraph Individualized • Information exchange does not occur routinely, but prison and community corrections treatment professionals are working to establish a system of filesharing to promote continuity of care • Medlin model used in prison, but most community providers do not use it Varies, about 18 months Not available Electronic • SOAB has database of convicted sex offenders assessed since 1996 • Data is currently being transferred to web-based application hosted by the Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 120 Evaluation Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Post-release services Case management o • Supervision Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Pennsylvania Justice Network • This will allow for analysis of sex offender data No REENTRY (Refers to state parole practices) • Reentry courts in two counties (York and Lackawanna)—modeled after drug courts • Program will likely expand to other counties Not available Yes Not available Not available Identified by Department of Corrections on “hard-to-place” list All sex offenders are eligible Not available Not available Not available • No official state criteria • Board of Probation and Parole works with Department of Corrections to maintain unofficial standards Board of Pardons and Parole and Department of Corrections Board of Pardons and Parole and Department of Corrections • State • Philadelphia also has grant funding from Blueprint project for employment reentry programming for medium and high risk offenders—building maintenance program teaches vocational skills • Transitional Coordinator Parole Agents supervise newly released state prison cases for up to 90 days before they are transferred to general caseload—agents help with transition to community supervision, parole condition compliance, accessing benefits and finding employment • Also Assessment, Sanctioning and Community Resource Agents—do not carry caseloads are experts in assessments (LSI-R and STATIC-99), identify additional community resources, ensure that graduated sanctions are utilized, and conduct cognitive-behavioral education offender groups Mainly parole but some state probation • Parole agent becomes part of treatment team for offender • Institutional parole agents provide information on treatment history and current needs of offender to field parole supervision staff—to be used in Transitional Accountability Plan Some nonprofits in Philadelphia--mainly faith-based In Philadelphia, most nonprofit service providers are faith-based • Mainly mentoring • Organization in Berks County that provides housing assistance • Referrals for life skills cognitive-behavioral therapy program, anger management, drug and alcohol treatment • Parole is starting to do cognitive groups • Crossroads Curriculum—offered by National Curriculum Training Institute (NCTI) and approved by the American Probation and Parole Association • Several Parole Agents trained and certified by NCTI to facilitate offender groups in over 20 subject areas that include life skills, domestic violence, anger management, felony offenses, etc Assessments, supervision fees, treatment referrals, employment, housing stability, technical parole violations, successful parole outcomes Electronic Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 121 Maintenance Evaluation Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Research Division of Parole Board Not yet—but reports that track outcomes COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (Refers to probation and parole) Yes Not mandatory—depends on sentence Not available Yes Probation and Parole (state and county) • State supervision is state-funded • County supervision is county-funded • County probation departments also have grant-in-aid from state 2000 (estimate) All offenders Low, medium, high, enhanced • Classify offenders into risk levels and supervision levels • Supervision staff can override assessment risk level recommendation, but sex offenders cannot be supervised below medium level • The supervision level directs number of contacts, urine tests, etc required each month STATIC-99, LSI-R Yes Sex offender protocol 50-60 • Trained by SOAB (part of Parole Board) • Trained by Center for Sex Offender Management Depends on sentence Not available Not available Assessments, supervision fees, treatment referrals, employment, housing stability, technical parole violations, successful parole outcomes Electronic Research Division of Parole Board Not yet—but reports that track outcomes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 122 Rhode Island Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research • Program in medium security facility, where most sex offenders serve majority of sentence • Due to staff limitations, intervention at other security levels is limited to program orientation, evaluation, and time limited educational classes Yes Guidelines developed by Rhode Island Sex Offender Task Force/Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (based on Colorado guidelines) Department of Corrections, Director of Behavioral Health State Yes • Primarily males • Not enough females to operate program • Females who meet program criteria are provided individual time-limited interventions if available May participate if illness is managed • Not mandatory for all sex offenders • Some are ordered by sentencing court to attend sex offender treatment • Parole Board guidelines require successful participation in treatment to qualify for serious parole consideration • • • • 400 sentenced (estimate) 50 pre-trial (estimate) 84 slots available for ongoing treatment in medium security specialized unit 6 slots available in maximum security unit psychoeducational class Not available Not available None Not available • 1 full-time provider • Volunteer staff provide classes for program participants Depends on severity of offense, criminal record, risk level, cooperativeness, progress, length of sentence As soon as space is available Relapse prevention, cognitive distortion, identifying and changing interpersonal contributing factors to crimes, assertiveness/skill building, etc No–medication only available for mental illness No Individualized • No—treatment is ongoing into community recovery • For release, sex offender must demonstrate substantive change in contributing factors to crimes and adequate level of awareness • No formal completion • Average number of parole releases per year is 6 (estimate) No formal licensing or certification requirements Not available STATIC-99 used over course of program Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 123 Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Recidivism Not available Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP) Not available TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Yes Not available Males and females Not available REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Yes Yes Not available Yes, - National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community (TPC) Initiative No—awaiting approval for funding to provide reentry classes to sex offenders who refuse to participate in Sex Offender Treatment Program All offenders who participate in the Sex Offender Treatment Program are eligible Not available Not available Not available • Parole Board • STATIC-00, Sex Offender Treatment Program reports factor into release decisions Approximately one year prior to release date Not available Yes—discharge planner COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Supervision Length Services Collaboration Not available Employment, education, housing, treatment, and other community needs Yes—with discharge planners Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 124 South Carolina Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Available in one treatment facility State Yes Males only No • Not mandatory for all sex offenders • Available to all sex offenders who meet the following criteria: o Offender must be within 5 years of release date o Offender must be sentenced for an offense that is reviewable by the Sexual Violent Predator Act o Offender must be free in system for three years o Offender must be able to read at a 5th grade level or higher o Offender must be ambulatory (unit on 2nd floor–not wheelchair accessible) o Offender’s mental health status must be stable 2,800 (estimate) 1.7% 1 46 100% Not available 1:46 20 months (official) 36 months, average • Phase 1: education • Phase 2: cognitive-behavioral therapy (assault cycle groups, arousal reconditioning, relationship skills, victim empathy, relapse prevention) No No Manualized No 70% Bachelor’s degree and continuing training Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 125 South Dakota Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • 3 main facilities for adult males • Available in women’s prison as well • Standardized program but standards not legislatively mandated • No Sex Offender Management Board Not applicable Not applicable State No Males and females • If person is mentally competent than can participate • If person needs treatment for mental illness, that is prioritized over sex offender treatment • Special needs sex offenders are maintained • Must be part of intensive treatment plan • Both convicted sex offenders and cases that plead down from sex offenses are screened for mandatory treatment • Treatment excludes individuals on hold in Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities, individuals with a life sentence, single misdemeanor cases, individuals with 6 years or longer between sex offenses • 804 total (official as of 4/1/08) • 493 convicted of sex offense, 311 who pleaded down from sex offense (official) 13% 4 (1 is women’s prison) • 60 at low-medium (estimate) • 30 at high-medium (estimate) • 10 at maximum security (estimate) 0% Not available 1:10 12 months (official) 12 months (official) Not available Not available Polygraphs Not available No Not available Licensing is not required To decide treatment regimen (low, moderate, high, and extreme) LSI-R, ABEL, PSCAN Demographics, crime codes, treatment completion, risk levels, info on victims, etc Electronic Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP) Numbers are reported Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 126 TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation No Males and females • Mandatory for sex offenders under community supervision if assessed as needing it • If current offense is sex offense, then offender will most likely be required to attend treatment • Department of Corrections (DOC) and SOMP decide eligibility SOMP staff State, offender Not available 225 Not available Not available 56% Not available 7 providers—some provide services in more than 1 community Statewide Not available Not available 36 of 225 completed as of last month • Level 1—cognitive restructuring, relapse prevention, weekly groups, ABEL assessment, polygraph monitoring, arousal control techniques, some GPS, psychopharmacological and/or chemical interventions • Level 2—cognitive restructuring, relapse prevention, weekly or biweekly groups, polygraph monitoring Yes Polygraphs Not available Yes 36 months Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Yes Yes 100% Yes, through Department of Education • Yes—through STOP program • Modules include family history, sexual terminology, sexual anatomy and diagramming, disclosure assignments All sex offenders entering community are eligible 22 total 7 (technically on parole but still housed in prison) 15 (in minimum custody unit) • Community Transition Program Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 127 Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Work with difficult to transition, those without families • Teach basic survival skills (6 weeks of classroom education), then job assistance through trustee facility Not available Department of Corrections, Board of Pardons and Parole, SOMP State, grants • Board of Pardons and Paroles • Department of Corrections makes decisions for sex offenders not released onto parole • Release decisions based on risk level—assessed using LSI-R, RRASOR, STATIC99, ABEL, MnSOST-R 2 months prior to release date • Depends on risk level and living situation upon release • Alcohol/drug treatment, mental health, etc Transitional case managers • Parole services case manager—not same as prison case manager • Prison case manager passes entire file to parole case manager upon release Not available Yes No Not applicable Not applicable • Individual and group counseling, polygraph testing, assessment, personality tests • Available until discharge Demographics, crime code, treatment compliance, treatment of days in contacting treatment provider Electronic—Parole Adult Tracking System (PATS) Board of Pardons and Parole Yes COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (Refers to Parole) Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Yes Supervision is mandatory Not applicable • Yes—all sex offenders are eligible • Decisions not necessarily based on offense severity • Some are under registration laws and residence laws for lifetime Parole 225 on parole State Not available All sex offenders • Intensive, maximum, moderate, minimum, and paper only (just a monthly progress report) • Sex offenders can only get about mid range Yes To assess changes in risk level, classification • ABEL, STATIC-99 • MnSOST-R • Community Risk Assessment Scale Some parole officers carry sex offenders on caseload, but retain non-sex offenders as Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 128 Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation well Experienced staff Not available Additional training 5 years (estimate) Group counseling, individual counseling, reassessments, polygraphs, mental health services Yes Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 129 Texas Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • Available in 3 facilities—2 male, 1 female • Prisoners move from other facilities to specialized facilities for treatment • 2 programs: o 18-month intensive treatment o 4-month education program for low risk offenders Treatment standards have existed since the early 1990’s • Council on Sex Offender Treatment (CSOT, 7-member board) • Developed by cooperative effort of different agencies • CSOT responsible for licensing sex offender treatment providers in the state • CSOT—continual review process • 3 revision processes since 1997, but no direct oversight of agencies State Yes, unless they have an order of deportation Males and females Ineligible if in special care facility, but otherwise eligible • Offenders in minimum custody with a current sex offense • If selected for treatment, it is required • • • • • 26,121 with current sex offense (official as of July 2007) 34,078 with current or prior sex offense (official as of July 2007) 484 treatment beds 111 education beds 28 beds for female offenders 3 (1 women’s) • Male prisons: 204 beds; 252 beds • Female prison: 28 beds 100% 0% 1:25 (estimate) • 18 months for treatment program • 4 months for education program Eligible within last 18-24 months before release date • Accepting responsibility for deviant behavior, victim empathy, cognitivebehavioral therapy, relapse prevention • Education program curriculum includes topics such as healthy sexuality, cognitive restructuring, etc No No General structure within which individual programs are created Depends on offender release type—Board of Pardons and Parole may vote that offender must successfully complete assigned treatment program in order to be released by specified date In last 2 fiscal years, 83% of offenders who entered treatment successfully completed it or were still successfully completing treatment at time of treatment • Must receive license—Department of Corrections has until 2010 to comply • Must have another mental health license (Master’s level or higher) • Must complete certain number of hours of specialized training Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 130 Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation All sex offenders are assessed (including those in civil commitment) • At treatment, used to get a snapshot of individual risk and needs • At civil commitment, used to determine whether or not further evaluation is needed • In general, tools used for risk assessment • At treatment—PAI (Personality Assessment Inventory—standardized for incarcerated offenders), clinical interview, MnSOST, STATIC-99, MSI, Sex offender incomplete sentence blank • For registration—since 1999 Texas has used STATIC-99, but moving toward a dynamic instrument that incorporates STATIC-99, PCLR (hair psychopathy checklist), LSI-R • All tools have been validated Demographics, offense, evaluation, length of time in treatment, treatment components, custody information, disciplinary issues Electronic Department of Corrections Criminal Justice Policy Council study looks at impact of programming State auditor’s report measures recidivism for sex offenders in treatment TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation, parole/mandatory supervision, and civil commitment) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Yes Males and females • Mandatory for all sex offenders under community supervision • Texas is only state with outpatient civil commitment State standardized plan tailored to individual needs • Probation/Parole—offenders required to pay for services • Civil commitment—Department of State Health Services Not available 3,773 (official as of 10/2007) Civil commitment—35 of 84 sexually violent predators being treatment in the community 427 providers licensed by DSHS (must have license to treat sex offenders) Statewide, but more providers in metropolitan areas than rural areas 0% All have slots available Not available • State standard requires arousal control, cognitive-behavioral therapy, sexual offense sequence and reoffense prevention, victim empathy, increasing social competency, comorbid diagnosis, support system, adjunct therapy if needed • Civil commitment employs assessments at onset and release using STATIC-99, MnSOST-R, PCLR • Biomedical approaches can be used (especially with sexually violent predators) • SSRIs, Depo Provera used most frequently • Chemical/physical castration used upon offender request • 4 types of polygraph tests—Instant offense, maintenance, monitoring, sexual history • Plethysmographs used in civil commitment Both—general state standard is individualized to offender needs • Most sex offenders do not receive treatment in prison • For those that have, there is an effort to make it continuous Varies—average for probationer is 1 year to 4 years Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 131 Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not applicable Not applicable Agencies maintain own data • 2005 legislation requires Council to study tools that best predict sex offender recidivism • Study based on probationers with sex offenses and 5-10 years of supervision • Results should be available by 2009 REENTRY Availability Reentry programming for sex offenders limited to pre-release treatment COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (refers to probation and parole) Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Parole—depends on sentence Not available Yes, but only if offender gets lifetime sentence and is paroled Probation (county-level) and parole (state-level) • Probation—12,910 sex offenders as of 8/31/06 • Parole—see above • Probation—county-funded • Parole—state-funded • Use STATIC-99 for classification until new system is in place 2003 • All sex offenders supervised on specialized caseload • Risk assessment mandated for registration and supervision purposes • 3 tiers (all higher than standard supervision): • Low: 2 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts (treatment provider, spouse) • Medium: 3 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts • High: 4 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts • Also Super Intensive Supervision Program (SISP)—includes non-sex offenders as well (requires 6 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts, monitoring component—GPS, active or passive) Registration and supervision STATIC-99 Yes Treatment, no contact with victim or children, no entry in child safety zones, no entry, polygraph, other discretionary provisions 30:1 (40:1 for SISP) • 40 hours of training (special training for SISP) • No additional certification requirements Not available • Most required to attend treatment—halfway houses, education (for offenders below certain education level) • Referrals to substance abuse services, family violence services, etc. Yes—between case manager, treatment provider, polygraph tester Demographics, offense, conditions, etc. Electronic Parole Division has Offender Information Management System Policy council does descriptive analysis Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 132 Utah Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Available in certain facilities Yes Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) • Legislature and multi-disciplinary Sex Offender Task Force • Prison programming staff oversees actual prison treatment programming Not available Yes, but depends on deportation status Males and females (as needed for females) Yes • Mandatory for all sex offenders • Small group of offenders (i.e. third degree felons) are assessed as not needing treatment 1,860 (official as of 8/07) Not available 1 prison, 1 county jail • 222 currently enrolled • 55 will be enrolled within next few months 1 (1,351 currently waiting, excluding those on INS and those not flagged yet) Not available 1:232 12-18 months 18 months prior to release date Cognitive-behavioral therapy (group only) • Impulse control drugs can be administered, but are very rarely used • Psychotropic drugs available for mental illness No, but trying to implement polygraphs in prison Both—core requirements for all, but therapist may tailor treatment to individual Yes—unless determined as ready to continue in a less restrictive program • 70 graduates in 2007 • Most who did not complete the treatment program still had their needs successfully met • Standards for treatment providers certified by Task Force—reviewed every 3 years • Continuing training—10 hours per year minimum To determine whether the offender is willing and ready for treatment, to determine academic ability • State-developed tool for pre-treatment assessment • Plan to implement psychosexual evaluation Tools TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Yes Males and females Not mandatory for all sex offenders, but almost all cases require evaluation and treatment • Usually the provider • Court or Parole Board can order an “intensive” course of treatment for certain Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 133 Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation offenses • Offender pays for private treatment • If offender cannot afford to pay in private sector, there are a couple of state programs in heavily populated areas (such as Salt Lake County) that can assist 842 (official) 725 (official) Not available About 100 licensed providers (estimate) Statewide, but few in rural areas Four half-way houses with inpatient sex offender programs are likely to have waiting lists Not available Not available • Cognitive-behavioral approach with relapse prevention • Individual, group, and psychoeducational sessions No, but psychotropic drugs are available for those with mental illness Polygraphs required as part of treatment and community supervision Individualized Yes—prison providers complete a termination summary on progress of the offender for community providers 18-36 months (estimate) Basic data Electronic Utah Department of Corrections has F-Track system Not available REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Yes Yes 100% • Participant in National Institute of Corrections study called Women Offender Caseload Management Model (WOCMM) for female inmates • Women’s prison has program called Your Parole Requires Extensive Preparation (Y-PREP) • Men’s and Women’s Summit groups incorporate services from community programs and volunteer services across state • Transition Parole Agents provide a higher level of service for parolees during first 90 days of release Yes, initiative to lower recidivism All offenders released onto parole Not available Not available • State • Offender pays for treatment in community whenever possible • Utah Board of Pardons and Parole • Release decisions based on Criminal History Assessment Matrix, severity of crime, victims, time served, programming completed while incarcerated, good behavior, assessment scores • Assessment tools used are Criminal History Assessment Matrix, STATIC-99, MnSOST-R Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 134 Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Release services begin 3-6 months prior to release date If sex offender required to complete Community Correctional Center program, offered transitional housing at Community Correctional Center Institutional Parole Officers assigned 6 months prior to release Transitional Parole Officers for 90 days (or until stable)—then transferred to standard parole officers, halfway houses, intense supervised parole Specialized parole officers—receive information in case file, programming information, parole agreement, any disciplinary action, etc Not available Yes 10% of nonprofits that provide reentry services are faith-based (estimate) Service provision Housing, employment services, treatment programming, counseling Information on recidivism Electronic Department of Corrections Yes – to evaluate recidivism COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Yes Not mandatory, but will be required in most cases • Judges and Parole Board decide • Have the option of requiring incarceration until end of sentence, but community supervision is utilized in almost all cases Option is available • Probation—842 (official) • Parole—725 (official) State Around 2003 All sex offenders • Intensive, High, Moderate, Low • All sex offenders are held to highest level of supervision for first year of community supervision • Reductions in standards may be requested after first year Measure improvement in dynamic areas (work, personal relationships, treatment, financial, etc) • Assessed every 6 months with LSI (only measuring traditional risks, not sex offender risk) • Department of Corrections does not formally utilize any tool designed to measure specific sexual risk • Providers use own risk assessment tools Yes • Specific training in sex offender management • Smaller caseloads 40-80, depending on location (estimate) Ongoing training available in highly populated areas but not rural areas • Probation—average of 36 months but ranges from 1 to 5 years (estimate) • Parole—3 years to lifetime supervision (estimate) Treatment with private providers or with state providers (for low income offenders) Yes—parole officers work closely with individual and group therapists, other local Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 135 law enforcement, prosecutors, defense lawyers, victim reparations case managers, social workers, Child Services workers, local government leaders, legislators, media, community groups, sex offender registration authorities, etc Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Vehicle information, family, health, education status, DNA, scars/marks, date of birth, legal status, employment • Sex offender-specific data—nature of offense, age of victim, victim approach, offense location, sexual behavior, physical description, voice sound, etc • Electronic correctional databases—F-Track and O-Track Department of Corrections Yes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 136 Vermont Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • Two facilities offer treatment for males—sex offenders transferred into these facilities for treatment • One facility for females Yes • No sex offender treatment board • Program started in 1982 with inpatient treatment providers and some out-patient treatment providers • Department of Corrections has decision-making authority • Covers correctional facilities, probation, parole (all are located in Department of Corrections) State Yes—except for people who are about to be extradited Males and females • Participate in group treatment with non-mentally ill sex offenders • Also individualized program for offenders who cannot handle group environment • Must be convicted of sexual offense or sexually related offense, must take some degree of responsibility for offense, must be open to treatment, and must not have detainer • Entry is prioritized by minimum release date • Offenders are divided into 3 levels of programming based on risk/need: o Low risk—6 months o Moderate risk—12-18 months o High/Violent—24-36 months 426 (official as of 6/30/07) • 83 (estimate) • Females on an as needed basis • 2 male facilities • 1 female facility 90 (total capacity for all 3 programs) Not available Not available Varies by program—6.5 clinicians • Low risk—6 months • Moderate risk—14 months • High/violent risk—24 months Calculated by subtracting duration of treatment from minimum release date Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, victim empathy, arousal conditioning, etc SSRIs and Luperon No Manualized Corrections will not recommend parole at minimum release date unless treated • Total completion rate since 1996 (all 3 levels): 69% (official) • 2002 high risk—74% • 2003 moderate risk—74% All providers must have Master’s degree in social work/psychology, but no special requirements for treating sex offenders. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 137 Assessment Purposes Tools Risk assessment, treatment progress • Risk assessed using RRASOR, STATIC-99, Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender Risk (VASOR—state customized tool) • For moderate-high risk sex offenders, also use PCLR (psychopathy checklist) for intensive program (LSI of 23 or higher) • Abel and Becker cognitive distortion scale, BURT rapist attitude scale, Michigan alcohol screen test, Wilson sex fantasy questionnaire, penile plethysmograph • Vermont also has state customized treatment progress scale for evaluating dynamic factors Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Demographics, risk scores, treatment progress scores Electronic and paper files Department of Corrections Community- and prison-based treatment evaluations TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other CC Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Mandatory (98% of sex offenders on probation and 100% on parole required to participate) Yes Males and females Must take responsibility for the sexual offense Provider determines risk level, but guidelines determine substance of program Offender, insurance, state 601 (official as of 6/30/07) 52 (official as of 6/30/07) Furlough status—109 (official as of 6/30/07) • About 350 offenders in treatment at any given time (estimate) • A lot of offenders have completed treatment and remain on supervision so this does not reflect the percentage of supervisees that participate in treatment Not available Not available Not available 12 (estimate) Statewide 0% 0% Not available Same as prison treatment Yes Polygraph used to determine compliance with supervision requirements Manualized Yes 24 months followed by 1 year of aftercare (for both probationers and parolees) Same as prison-based treatment Electronic and paper Department of Corrections Yes REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Yes Yes (but no halfway houses for sex offenders) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 138 Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management o Supervision o Service coordination Nonprofit involvement o Faith-based o Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation 100% Not available Yes—Community Justice Program, but no longer funded • Any sex offender who has gone through treatment is eligible • 94 on furlough in June 2007 Not available Not available All programs are same Department of Corrections Department of Corrections State Department of Corrections has authority to release on furlough 6 months prior to anticipated release date • Main focus is to develop social support system • Also housing, employment services • Case manager assigned at intake • Each prison has a designated case manager Probation/parole officers—collaborate with prison case manager Probation/parole officers Not available Some Yes Service providers (some have shelters) • Housing, social support, rehabilitation services • No halfway houses—Department of Corrections funding can be used to help with initial housing costs if necessary Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Yes Mandatory for all sex offenders Not applicable Yes—determined by court Probation and parole (parole officers supervise furlough) Not available State Not available Not available Low-moderate, moderate-high, high Assess risk, treatment progress Same tools used as in prison-based treatment Yes Polygraph, but no GPS or electronic monitoring Not available Specialized training Varies Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 139 Services Collaboration • Housing, social support, rehabilitation services • No halfway houses, but Department of Corrections funding can be used to help with initial housing costs if necessary Not available Virginia Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? • One intensive residential treatment program for medium to high risk sex offenders (SORT) • 15 designated sites provide less intensive services No Not applicable Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 140 Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Department of Corrections (DOC) • Residential program is on a specific legislative budget • The rest is funded by DOC Yes • Only males have access to residential treatment • Limited treatment for females Screened for stability before entering treatment • Intensive program—eligibility based on time in system, medium to high risk of re-offense, behavior record • Other programs—everyone is screened • Once eligible, treatment is compulsory—lose ability to earn good time if refuse 3,500 (estimate) • 20% in some sort of programming (estimate) • Probably only 5% in sex offender-specific programming (estimate) 16 • SORT—78 active, 42 pending • Other programs—8-12 per group, 1 group per facility 100% (estimate) 0% (estimate) • SORT– 1:11 (includes mental health professionals, social workers, risk assessment administrators) • Varies for other programs • SORT–2-3 years (estimate), with maximum of 6 years • Other programs–up to one year, but new groups will be 12-18 weeks • SORT–preference is to begin 3-6 years before release date • Other programs vary SORT—relapse prevention, covert sensitization, cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal control • Only in SORT—use SSRIs, but not very often (only 4 of 52 admissions in 2007 received SSRIs) Polygraphs used only in SORT SORT is individualized Not available • 62% in 2007 • Of 50 discharged cases—1 administrative removal, 28 paroled, 4 refused programming, 11 treatment removals/expulsions, 3 removals for security reasons, 3 sexually violent predators were civilly committed • Qualified Mental Health Practitioners • In general, master’s level education • If working with sex offenders, must be state-certified (or working on it), or under the supervision of someone who is certified • Must be certified within a year of start date in residential program • Department of Corrections has American Correctional Association standards as well –40 hours of training a year • SORT—pre-screening to assess risk level • If medium to high risk, assessed for risk and needs • Other programs—to prioritize cases, assess sexual interest • Some clinical override allowed • SORT—Stable (but staff only use as guideline) • Other programs—STATIC-99, LSI-R, MSI, MMPI Data and Research Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 141 Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not available Electronic Department of Research and Development Process evaluation on SORT TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes—but most of the time they would be detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement Males and females Most sex offenders must successfully complete treatment as a condition of their probation Parole officer and treatment provider make treatment decisions, sometimes with input from others • DOC • Co-pay from offenders in some districts 2,400 as of March 4, 2008 (estimate) Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available New contract began in October 2007—26 providers on contract Statewide Some Not available Not available Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention No Polygraphs • Treatment plans should be individualized • Some group treatment is manualized Only one prison treatment program (SORT)—if individual released from SORT then community treatment is consistent Varies Yes Electronic DOC—Research and Evaluation Department Some analysis in containment sites REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Yes Yes–most are provided by non-governmental agencies through Department of Criminal Justice Services funding • All have programming to an extent • Productive Citizenship offered in all facilities but there are waiting lists so not all inmates will receive it • Virginia Reentry Policy Academy (established in June 2006) • Outgrowth of work with National Governor’s Association No All sex offenders are eligible Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 142 Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management o Supervision o Service coordination Nonprofit involvement o Faith-based o Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not available Not available Not available No–but under development by the Sex Offender Steering Committee (SOSC) Not applicable Not applicable Pre-release—State general funds Post-release—Department of Criminal Justice Services • For those sentenced pre-1995, Parole Board is releasing authority • Offenders sentenced since 1995—released by DOC when time completed • Upon release, sex offenders are assessed using the STATIC-99 to determine whether or not they should be considered for civil commitment • Depends on availability • Want to begin prioritizing people who are near release date • Productive Citizenship curriculum has 15 sessions—general introduction, communication and problem solving, values, dealing with emotion, healthy living, healthy sexuality, employment, banking and money management, securing housing and transportation, family matter, active parenting, family legal issues, substance abuse, resources ad referral, and making it on supervision • Breaking Barriers workshop—based on cognitive-behavioral model • Sex Offender Awareness Program (SOAP)–15-session psychoeducational program offered at designated sites Institutional counselors assigned at admission Containment model in 17 sites District parole officer—works with other agencies • Collaboration on home plan for sex offender—counselor sends updated home plan to parole officer through community release unit • Also 5 reentry specialists who work in institution and community setting Yes DOC may contract with faith-based services if they comply with program standards Provide referrals to other agencies–mainly for employment services (interview skills, life skills, help purchase job-related equipment, transportation, etc.) See above • Offender-Based State Correctional Information System contains data on program participation • EIS is where counselors enter home plans • In process of developing a system that interfaces data between agencies Electronic DOC Research and Management Section does some analysis COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Yes Majority of sex offenders are under some type of supervision • Determined at sentencing • Parole was abolished in 1999—majority of currently supervised sex offenders entered supervision since them No Probation and Parole 2,400 DOC Not based on risk Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 143 Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not available Not available Assess risk All sex offenders released from prison with a predicate offense for Civil Commitment are assessed using the STATIC-99 In some larger districts Not available • Varies by district • Senior should carry no more than 24 cases • Field officers should carry no more than 40 cases Required to complete courses that include Introduction to Supervision of Sex Offenders, Supervision Practices in the Community, Self-Defense 5 years average (estimate) Substance abuse services, sex offender treatment, polygraph, job training Yes Yes Electronic DOC–Research and Evaluation Department As described above Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 144 Washington, DC Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Funding Population Probation Parole Other CC Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other CC Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Yes Males and females • Not mandatory • Decisions about treatment are based on assessments of risk and needs • All offenders are referred for assessment with a provider based on criminal history and the provider assesses whether or not treatment is necessary Federal funding 500 on probation and parole (estimate) 65-70% (estimate) Three contracted providers Not available 0% 0% Not available • Supervise under containment model including supervision, treatment, monitoring and polygraph • Cognitive behavioral treatment • Provider services must be consistent with Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers and Center for Sex Offender Management approach Available on an as needed basis but not widely used Polygraphs used in assessment and throughout treatment process Individualized • Limited information from Bureau of Prisons • Court Services Offender Supervision Agency starts fresh with their own assessments and treatment plans 18-24 months • Collect information on demographics • Beginning to track treatment characteristics Electronic Court Services Offender Supervision Agency None COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions • Court Services Offender Supervision Agency supervises all offenders placed on probation by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia • Parole pursuant to the District of Columbia Code • Not mandatory, depends on sentencing • If probation case does not finish treatment, there is the option of getting probation extended to complete treatment Judicial discretion Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 145 Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration • Probation: 5 year limit • Lifetime supervision is an option for parole Court Services Offender Supervision Agency supervises all offenders placed on probation 500 on probation and parole (estimate) Federal funding (refers to adult probation and parole only) District of Columbia has its own auto screener since 2004 (for risk and needs) All sex offenders Two different systems: • For registration: A, B, C, D • For supervision: Intensive, Maximum, Medium, or Minimum For registration and supervision • Auto screener looks at dynamic and static needs • It is in the process of being validated Yes • Global Positioning System (GPS), Electronic Monitoring, computer search conditions, special conditions around contact with minors • Conditions vary by releasing authority or based on assessment outcome • No standardized list 1:25 Receive special training • Probation: 2 years (estimate) • Parole: 5 years (estimate) • Vocational Occupation Unit provides GED, vocational skills, life skills, domestic violence treatment • Treatment referred to outside agency • Mental health services provide through the Department of Mental Health Yes Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 146 Washington Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content o Drugs o Truth tests o Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research No management board—but standard in place for programs and outcomes measured Not applicable Not applicable Legislature Available for all sex offenders but not all sex offenders receive treatment due to limited resources Yes Male and females Available to them but they are not required to participate • Decisions about who to place in treatment are based on risk assessment scores on RRASOR, MnSOST-R, and STATIC-99 • Offender must also have minimum of 12 months left to serve 3,187 of 18,209 state prisoners (17.5%) were sentenced for sex offenses (official) • 200 active treatment beds full for males • 8-10 women in treatment • Treatment extends outside of prison as well—currently about 15% of the total treatment population is still in prison (official) Two (one male, one female) • 200 for males • 8-10 for females Both prisons have a waiting list 0% 1:13 (official) 13 months average (for both males and females) 20 months prior to earliest release date (official) • Relapse prevention, cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal reconditioning, victim empathy (limited), plethysmograph • Both group and individual treatment • Intake plans based on risk and needs Medication provided when necessary, but not through sex offender treatment program No polygraphs Individualized • Offenders under the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board (ISRB) are required to attend treatment, but other sex offenders are not • For sex offenders in general, participation in treatment may influence parole board decision 92% (official) • No certification or registration requirement for treatment providers, but it may come up in legislation this year • Currently there are minimum qualifications which reflect community standards for certified sex offender providers • Prioritize individuals for treatment • Identify notification level for each offender LSI-R, STATIC-99, RRASOR, MnSOST-R Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 147 Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Demographics, completion rates, time in treatment—mainly for tracking purposes Electronic Department of Corrections (DOC) Washington State Institute for Public Policy conducts evaluations for the state TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation 3 types of community-based treatment: 1. Treatment continues from prison in DOC program 2. Treatment by private providers paid for by DOC 3. Treatment by private providers paid for by offender Yes—unless deported Males and females • If treated in prison, expected to continue treatment in the community • Most offenders have treatment as stipulation in sentence Provider makes decisions about length of treatment, etc. Three streams: 1. Legislative funding to continue with prison treatment program 2. DOC funding for treatment from private providers 3. Offenders pay on their own Probation and parole are consolidated Not applicable Not applicable Community Corrections—3,344 of 27,650 cases (12.1%) are sex offenders (estimate) Not applicable Not applicable 30% (estimate) • Private providers must be certified to serve sex offenders • Also must have continuing education, tests, etc • For DOC program that continues from prison treatment—eight state staff with one supervisor • Private providers are numerous Statewide Not available Not available Not available • For DOC program that continues from prison treatment—content is same as in prison • Content varies among private providers (applies to all subheadings in this category) No drugs for DOC program DOC uses polygraph and plethysmograph DOC is individualized Yes (for DOC program) 23 months (estimate) See prison-based treatment See prison-based treatment See prison-based treatment See prison-based treatment See prison-based treatment REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Yes Yes Every facility offers some reentry programming Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 148 Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management Supervision o Service coordination Nonprofit involvement o Faith-based o Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • Legislature and DOC each have an initiative—DOC initiative is called The Reentry Initiative • DOC recently received $25 million from the legislature to enhance services and change reentry programming General reentry programming applies to sex offenders, but there is a special focus on better managing sex offenders All offenders Not available Not available Yes—in development DOC DOC, legislature Legislative funding • 2 authorities: 1. DOC 2. ISRB—has jurisdiction over some offenders with offenses prior to 1984 (only about 140 offenders left in system) • In 2001 new legislation created determinate-plus sentencing for persistent sex offenders—ISRB determines release for these offenders based on instruments listed in prison section and polygraph test • In theory, pre-release programming starts the day the offender begins his/her sentence • Mandated to start as early as 2 years prior to release • Life skills, job assistance, family services, substance abuse services, mental health programming • Content of programming varies by the security level of the facility—maximum security prisons focus more on violence reduction • Family-based programming is restricted in certain situations • Classification counselors assigned in prison • Assigned 18-20 months before earliest release date • Community Corrections officer manages post-release cases • Some service providers come into prison to work with offender 6-12 months before release, and they continue after release as well (this includes treatment providers, reentry specialists, mental health providers) Community Corrections/Parole • Information sharing between pre- and post-prison case managers • Providers coordinate services Yes At least half of nonprofits who provide reentry services are faith-based (estimate) • Sexual assault advocates—involved in placement and reentry • Others offer specific services, including housing services Same services that are available to all offenders—life skills, chemical dependency, resume development, etc Starting to collect data on new reentry initiative—but data is limited at this point DOC Electronic Not available COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Yes • Depends on when they were sentenced • Offenders sentenced after 1990 are supervised post-release Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 149 Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Not applicable Yes Community Corrections (Probation/Parole)—supervises only felons 3,333 sex offenders (7.8% of total population) (official) Legislature There will be new risk instrument in the spring of 2008 • All sex offenders coming from institutions into the community • Classification also required for sex offenders who go straight onto probation, but done by local law enforcement • Notification: Level 1: in-family offender, information not released to media, just local law enforcement Level 2: moderate risk—can be released on statewide registry Level 3: high risk—media release, direct mailings • Cutpoints for each level are based on actuarial assessments (LSI-R, MnSOST-R, RRASOR, STATIC-99) Risk classification, registration and notification requirements, determine who is predatory Same tools as in prison • In urban areas, where populations are more dense, they have specialized caseloads • No specialized caseloads in rural areas because not enough sex offenders under supervision More supervision, GPS Varies No additional certification—but sex offender supervisors receive additional training • Three years on average (official number) • Determinate-plus cases will be lifetime supervision Treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy, mental health programs, job services, life skills Yes • Monitoring and tracking data available • Trying to supplement this data with acute information on homelessness, etc. (collected through hand surveys) DOC Electronic Yes—through Government Accountability and Performance program Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 150 West Virginia Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Standard being developed by Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR) in compliance with the Child Protective Act passed in 10/06 Not applicable Not applicable Through contract services Available for all sex offenders Yes Males and females Yes • Not mandatory for all sex offenders • Phase 1 recommended for all sex offenders as part of Individualized Program Plan 5,869 (estimate) Not available 8 (official, Department of Programs) 12 (official, Program Mentor/Department in-house standard from programming) 90% (estimate) 10% (estimate) 1:12 (estimate) 4 phases • Phase 2: ongoing until granted parole or within 6 months of discharge • Phase 3: starts when granted parole within mandatory holding period or when offender is within 6 months of discharging sentence Over one year—often more (estimate) Cognitive behavioral therapy, arousal control, victim empathy, sexual education, social skills, anger management, legal issues including registry requirements, motivation for offense No No Manualized No 46.9% (official, 2006-2007 Annual Report) • Provider must be employed by West Virginia Department of Corrections or contracted service provider • Department of Corrections certifies providers • Includes continuing review • Includes continuing training—all providers must attend mandatory 32 hours annual training and are encouraged to attend the 2 day follow-up retreat Sex offenders not assessed for treatment—assessed during classification For inclusion in psychological evaluation RRASOR, MnSOST Enrollment/completion stats Electronic West Virginia Department of Corrections None TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 151 Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Yes Males and females Mandatory for all sex offenders until released by provider Contract providers • Sex offender management fund • Supervision fees • Private pay (Following numbers are for Department of Corrections only) 49 (estimate) 77 (estimate) Not applicable 100% of those supervised by Department of Corrections 100% 100% Not applicable Exact number not available—Department of Corrections employs 7 contract providers Localized, only available in larger cities None (official, contractual documents) None (official, contractual documents) Not available No Yes Not available Yes 2 years in parole, could be longer if they do not successfully complete the program REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Yes 100% No No • West Virginia Parole Board • Criteria decision based on criminal history and behavior while in prison 6 months Three levels of sex offender classes offered All prisoners are assigned case workers, whether they take programming or not If on parole, then parole officers Not available Not available Yes Not available Medical issues, mentoring While on parole, they can get sex offender counseling Yes Program attendance Electronic Department of Corrections Not available Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 152 COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Not mandatory • No supervision for prisoners who discharge their sentences • West Virginia State Judges or those states sending offenders to West Virginia decide Yes, for sexually violent predators Enhanced supervision, electronic monitoring, polygraph, treatment • Total: 126 • Probation: 49 (estimate) • Parole: 77 (estimate) Sex offender management fund, parole supervision fees collected Yes • Implemented 2006 • Modified August 2007 All Low, moderate, high Yes Assess risk and treatment SOTNPS by treatment provider Yes Increased contacts, electronic monitoring, polygraph, mandated treatment 35-40, estimate Electronic monitoring, sex offender policy 2 years (estimate) Treatment and counseling either by agency contracted staff or private pay providers Yes Records of polygraphs and results, electronic monitoring duration, treatment and completion Electronic Department of Corrections for Department of Corrections offenders Yes, evaluation compliance to sex offender specific laws and policy Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 153 Wisconsin Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification Assessment Purposes Tools Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes, in certain facilities (treatment and program facilities) Yes Not available Not available State • Not available for all sex offenders • For some, recommend lower level of treatment in community (i.e. education, aftercare); higher risk offenders are eligible Yes Males and females Not required • Recommended for some • Sex offenders have the option of refusing As of April 18, 2008, 4,600, or 20-25% of prison population for hands-on offense (estimate) • About 12% (based on official data but estimate) • Does not count people who are in for life sentences (treatment only starts within last 5 years of sentence) or offenders who refuse treatment 8 facilities 12 offenders per program—there may be multiple programs per facility 100% 0% 1:6 (2:12) From 6 months to 2 years • Shorter term: within about 36 months • Longer term: within about 5 years before sentence is complete Cognitive behavioral therapy, Thornton’s approach No, though psychotropics available to treat mental illness Yes, polygraphs in 2 of the programs (both are from long term programs) Manualized No • Short term: 80-85% • Long term: 80% None required To determine risk level and pervasiveness—this will determine course of treatment (short term versus long term) None—in house assessment procedure based on PRASOR and STATIC-99 Varies between programs Varies between programs Varies between programs Margaret Alexander, 1999 REENTRY Availability • Reentry is a philosophy—not a program • Technically, everything the Department does from the point of intake through discharge is to prepare offenders for reentry Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 154 Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management • Pre-release curriculum offered to all inmates o Has 10 modules: wellness, health, personal development, family support, education, employment, financial literacy, housing, transportation, transitional preparation • Provides inmates with portfolios to store critical documents (resumes, identification, etc.) • 5 year strategic business plan: assessment, case planning, program and intervention, data collection and measurement, and organization and philosophy Yes • 100% • Approximately 23,000 adult males (unified correction system; includes total inmate population male and female adults—sex offenders comprise 20% of total population) • Reentry Initiative • Strategic Business Plan (what we need to do for next 5 years) • Initiatives with Department of Transportation • Department of Health and Family Services – focusing on specific population like women with children • Department of Workforce Development, • Process for offenders to apply for food share benefits, mentor programs, identification programs, linkages to Social Security Administration (SSA), driver’s license initiatives, employment programs, etc. • Public information document • Services individualized for inmates based on risk and need • Curriculum offered to sex offenders but are tailored to sex offender risk and needs • Notification and registration services provided Everyone eligible 100% of sex offenders are in reentry programs Not available Not available • Policies and procedures cover both institution and community corrections • Relationship with SSA, Department of Veteran Affairs—there are standards for all treatment programs in institutions • Some are Executive Directives from Secretary of Department, Administrator of Adult Institutions, Community Corrections Administrative Directives, signed by administrator Varies Varies State, volunteer partnerships, federal grants (no funding for sex offenders through federal grants) • Parole Commission (under old law) and courts (with the passing of truth in sentencing) • Criteria based on release dates • Tools used: RRASOR, STATIC-99, MnSOST At intake • Drug treatment, housing, cognitive behavioral therapy, sex offender treatment program • Evidenced-based practices—intensive sex offender treatment • Intervention strategies geared towards relapse prevention related to directing prisoner to reentry • All treatment is centered around relapse prevention • All inmates have social workers • All inmates not released via Maximum Discharge have agent assigned to them upon release • Multidisciplinary team managing Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 155 Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Case managers Exchange of information Yes Yes Not available Varies Group therapy, individual therapy, sex education/sexual values clarification/sexual dysfunction prevention, social skills training, assertiveness training, cognitive restructuring, victim impact/victimization awareness, covert sensitization, masturbatory satiation, relapse prevention. Yes Demographics, case, assessment, criminal history, sex offender registry, psychosocial Not available Not available Yes COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Yes • Not mandatory—under old law, some offenders come out on parole upon completing sentence • Under new law there is always a period of supervision Not available • Yes, law passed in 1997 • Some based on conviction • 5,093 under active supervision and on registry • Sex offenders supervised based on behavior, not on registry • 7,200 are sex offenders—in those not just required to register • Probation: 3 out of 4 • Parole: 1 out of 4 State Only type of classification is notification levels (only certain sex offenders require notification) Not available Not available Not available Supervision and risk of reoffending RRASOR, STATIC-99, MnSOST Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 156 Wyoming Sex Offender Treatment & Reentry Programs TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED Availability State standard Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Eligibility Noncitizens Gender Mentally ill Criteria for eligibility Population Sex offenders in prison population Percentage in treatment Programs Prisons with programs available Average capacity Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Average ratio of providers/offenders Average duration Enrollment date Content • Drugs • Truth tests • Individualized vs. manualized Treatment requirement for release Completion rate Provider certification • Yes—at male facilities • No discrete female sex offender treatment program because of low numbers • Evaluation is only service available at women’s prison Association for Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) Wyoming Department of Corrections Wyoming Department of Corrections • Available for all sex offenders • Some sex offenders are incarcerated in out-of-state facilities—treatment is not available for those offenders incarcerated out-of-state Yes (if Immigration and Customs Enforcement does not immediately pick them up) • Males are eligible • Evaluation only for females, and on individualized bases due to mental health evaluation • For female offenders, parole has requirement to seek treatment Yes—with consultation with mental health staff and ongoing coordination • Not mandatory for all sex offenders—only if they are assessed as needing it is treatment required • Criteria not necessarily based on index offense (i.e. if convicted of sex offense in past, then evaluated through sex offender specific evaluation—includes STATIC99) • If offenders refuse, it affects their parole status 355 (official from MIS based on sentencing and treatment data) 33% 3 (official) Total between 210 and 230 (the 3 facilities have capacity for 75, 60, and 75) 0% 0% • About 1:55 in one facility • 1:35 at other facility About 24 months Within 2 years of projected release date Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, workbook component, core treatment component, reentry transition stage, Robert Longo workbook (Who am I and Why am I in Treatment), understanding offense cycle, relapse prevention planning, release planning, victim empathy, work issues, men’s identity issues, domestic violence, managing stress, substance abuse, human sexuality No; psychotropics available to treat mental illness Yes – polygraphs and plethysmograph Manualized Technically no, but does affect parole status Not available • No legislatively created standard • Requirements: advanced degrees, license, background, 2,000 hours of sex offender clinical experience, 500 hours in sex offender specific evaluation, 1,000 hours in sex offender specific provision of treatment • Continuing training: 40 hours of sex offender specific continuing education per year Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 157 Assessment Purposes Tools Assess risk and treatment need • STATIC-99, intake interview, structured clinical interview, official version of crime, NCIC checks • General: memory, reading test, head injury; ABEL screen, plethysmograph, polygraph, HARE, MILAN, California Psychological Inventory, WAIS, etc • No data specific sex offender information collected • Currently implementing new probation and parole database Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment • Electronic • Paper files for specific sex offender information Wyoming Department of Corrections • Generally, yes—no sex offender specific • 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole) Availability Noncitizens Gender Criteria for eligibility Individualized treatment plans Funding Population Probation Parole Other community corrections Percentage in treatment Probation Parole Other community corrections Treatment providers Number Distribution Percentage with waiting list Percentage with 25% empty slots Completion rate Treatment modality Drugs Truth tests Individualized vs. manualized Continuity of treatment Average duration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Available, however sex offender specific treatment is not readily available in all districts (depends on rural areas, population, service availability) Yes Males and females • Not mandatory for sex offender under community supervision • Judge makes determination Developed by mental health provider in conjunction with supervising agency Offenders are responsible for payment—based on sliding scale 245 (official, by field count) 50 (official, by field count) Not applicable 61.6% (official) 58% (official) Not applicable • 15 have sex offender specific treatment programs, operational and localized and associated with community mental health centers • Official number, internal survey Localized and associated with community mental health centers Not available Not available Not available • Group/individual treatment options • Sex offender treatment are usually individual treatment No drugs administered, though psychotropics available to treat mental illness Yes Individualized Yes, available upon parole plan Not available • No data specific sex offender information collected • Currently implementing new probation and parole database Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment • Electronic • Paper files for specific sex offender information Wyoming Department of Corrections • Generally, yes—no sex offender specific • 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 158 REENTRY Availability Pre-release Post-release Percentage of state prisons with services Specific initiatives Specialized sex offender programming Eligibility Population • Pre-release • Post-release State standard? Developed by whom? Oversight by whom? Funding Pre-release programming Releasing authority and criteria Enrollment date Services available Case management Post-release services Case management • Supervision • Service coordination Nonprofit involvement • Faith-based • Role Services available Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation Yes Yes 100% (3 facilities) • Series of Violent Offenders and Prisoner Reentry • Housing placement and additional forensic evaluation for higher risk • Several staff initiatives developed as result of first 2 initiatives—really identifying higher risk offenders, specifically sex offender population Yes • Technically all are eligible for parole, based on need • Prioritize high risk and high need Not available Not available Not available No, but guidelines developed Not applicable Not applicable State and federal grants • Wyoming Parole Board • Criteria: served appropriate amount of sentence, demonstrated adaptive changes • Assessment tools: STATIC-99, COMPASS, status reports At least 1 year prior to reentry Reentry specific programming (housing, vocational, facilitating continuity of formal treatment programs – substance abuse, mental health treatment, identification cards, SSI, rehabilitation) Yes, for higher risk they have an additional higher risk case manager • Upon release, field services (if have additional parole), if they do not have parole but have needs in community then provide connections to community providers, but not necessarily followed up • Joint reentry initiative—Department of Health and Department of Corrections— serious and mentally ill offenders identified a year out, ongoing case management, representative of Department of Health, services maintained • Department of Health follows offenders for 3 months after No prison case manager Yes, exchange of information Yes Very small percentage (maybe 5%) Direct service provision Mental health, substance abuse, sex offender treatment, job service • No data specific sex offender information collected • Currently implementing new probation and parole database Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment • Electronic • Paper files for specific sex offender information Wyoming Department of Corrections • Generally, yes—no sex offender specific • 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender COMMUNITY SUPERVISION Availability Eligibility Yes Community supervision not mandatory Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 159 Criteria for decisions Lifetime supervision Supervising agencies Population Funding Classification system Year implemented/updated Required for Risk levels Assessment Purposes Tools Specialized caseloads Provisions Caseload Supervisor requirements Supervision Length Services Collaboration Data and Research Type Storage Maintenance Evaluation • • • • Made by local district court Department of Corrections Field Services make pre-sentence reports Yes Based upon offense and determined by sentencing court • Probation: 245 (official) • Parole: 50 (official) State Sex offender specific instrument—effective 2007 All, unless sex offense is not classified offense—would not be required to be supervised High, medium and low Yes Supervision strategy • Jackson County, STATIC-99, psychosexual evaluation, COMPAS • Jackson County and COMPAS also used by parole/probation • Not across department • In 2 offices, but these also have regular cases on caseload Not available Not available Not available Not available • Sex offender specific treatment not available in all areas of Wyoming • Based on low population, service availability, size of state Yes • No data specific sex offender information collected • Currently implementing new probation and parole database Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment • Electronic • Paper files for specific sex offender information Wyoming Department of Corrections • Generally, yes—no sex offender specific • 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders Vera Institute of Justice 160