University of DenverStrategic Issues Program

September 9, 2010

Peter A. Weir, Former Executive DirectorColorado Department of Public Safety

Challenges facing Colorado’s criminal justice system: Is it time for reform?

Challenges facing government

•Budget shortfalls•Budget shortfalls•Budget shortfalls•Budget shortfalls•Budget shortfalls

Challenges facing government:Budget shortfalls•Over the past three years, the governor and legislature have cut shortfalls totaling $4.3 billion

•The federal government has provided $1.6 billion over the past three years to help Colorado balance the budget.

•Gov. Ritter said without the federal funding, he would have been forced to cut another $140 million from public education.

Challenges facing government: Budget shortfalls•Gov. Ritter is reluctantly using money from medical marijuana registrations to help the state meet a $60 million budget shortfall.

•The September revenue forecast will be used to help shape Ritter's budget for next year, due Nov. 1. Previous forecasts have indicated a $500 million to $1 billion shortfall in FY2011-12, meaning more tough decisions must be made

GAO forecasts: Discouraging through 2050

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Four largest areas of state spending

1. K-12 education2. Higher education3. Corrections4. Medicaid

Challenges: Budget shortfallColorado spends 9 percent of its total

general fund expenditures on corrections. Between 1987 and 2007, Colorado

posted the second highest increase (5.1 percent) in the proportion of correctional spending in the U.S.

The DOC budget for fiscal year 2011 is over $730 million.

In 2007, about 20 percent of Colorado’s prison beds were occupied by people who had failed parole.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Violent Crime rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rateViolent Crime

rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rate

Property crime rateProperty crime

rateProperty crime rate

Property crime rate

Colorado's violent vs. property crime arrests

1980-2008

Colorado crime rates and justice system expenditures - 1982-2005

Colorado incarceration rates1980-2005

CO doubled sentencing ranges in 1985

TexasIdahoW. VaMissCOTennMTNDMNUtahSDHIIowaWANVOKPAAKCalifILMIRISCMDNJMaineNY

224%216%190%171%146%141%131%124%123%116%114%132%101% 97% 90% 80% 68% 67% 55% 48% 47% 37% 35% 32% 25% 22%

Percentage Increase: Number of Sentenced Prisoners, Selected States,

1990-2002

From: Michael Jacobson (2005), Downsizing Prisons, p. 33

Texas-------224%Colorado--145%New York---22%Overall state average------80%

Why the increase? •Longer sentences

•More admissions

•Increase in parole and probation violators

•Increase in drug offendersNationwide, convictions increased about 18% in the 1990s and prison admissions increased

about 60%

SOURCE: Mark Mauer (2007). The hidden problem of time served in prison. Social Research, Vol. 74, No. 2, page701. (Sentencing Project website)

Percent of Americans Who Prefer Tougher Approach to

Crime or Tougher Approach to the Causes of Crime

1994 and 20011994 2001

Tougher Approach to

Crime42% 32%

Tougher Approach to

Causes of Crime

48% 65%

Michael Jacobson (2005), Downsizing Prisons; Source: Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Inc. (2002) The New Politics of Criminal Justice, Washington, D.C.

ChallengesIn July, 22,813 were in prison and 9,000

were on parole (500 fewer in prison than one year ago)

11,000 people entered prison each year and serve about 22 months

10% of the DOC population in FY2009 was serving time for a parole technical violation

49% of the population are past their parole eligibility date

78% have substance abuse problems; 23% require sex offender treatment; 61% have vocational problems; 30% have academic problems.

July 2010 Statistical Bulletin; Colorado Department of Corrections Statistical Report, FY 2009

Challenges: Cost and Success RatesAverage cost of prison: $32,300/year

3-year return-to-prison rates: 53%New crime: 18%Technical violation: 35%

22% is the return-to-prison rate when NOT released on parole (new crimes)

Colorado Department of Corrections Statistical Report, FY 2009

Colorado’s CJS: ChallengesCost of imprisonmentLack of effectiveness of imprisonment,

based on recidivism ratesImplementation of established Evidence

Based Practices to reduce recidivism

Method to address challenges: Colorado

Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice

“Are you just pissing and moaning or can you verify what

you’re saying with data?”

Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice

Established in 2007, began work in 2008Multidisciplinary membership of 26

professionalsMandated to focus on evidence-based

recidivism reduction and cost effective expenditures of limited criminal justice funds

Mandated to assess the effectiveness of sentences imposed to meet the purposes of sentencing and the need to prevent recidivism and re-victimization

C.R.S. 16-11.3-103

Pyramid of Evidence-Based Practices

Pyramid source: Co-Occurring Center for Excellence (COCE), funded through the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Available at http://www.coce.samhsa.gov/cod_resources/PDF/OP5-Practices-8-13-07.pdf

National Academy of Sciences National Research Council 2008 Report on Parole, Desistance from Crime, and Community Integration.

Statistical method that synthesizes many individual studies into one large study with many subjects; adheres to pre-established protocol to select studies; calculates an average effect size to reduce bias and ensure comprehensiveness.

Most Colorado studies of

criminal justice programs

Anecdotal events often drive policy

Evidence: Does incarceration reduce the crime rate?The empirical evidence is increasingly clear that the increased use of incarceration for low-rate, non-violent offenders prevents and deters few crimes.

◦ PUNISHMENT

Employment, marriage, and aging are linked to desistance from crime.

Public policies that block employment and other opportunities for ex-offenders to resume a regular life in the community eventually lead to higher rates of failure.

◦ SEALING OF RECORDS

Evidence: The time immediately following release from prison is the riskiest for the offender and the public• Assessing risk and service needs of offenders at the point of release (DOC),• Targeting services that meet at least 5 of the offenders most pressing needs (housing, employment, substance abuse treatment, antisocial peer associations, and criminal attitudes) in the weeks and months immediately following release, and• Provides the most cost-beneficial approach to reducing recidivism and increasing public safety

Evidence: Based on 30 years of research (handout)

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for recidivism reduction in corrections

#1. Assess offender risk/needs using actuarial scales.

2. Enhance intrinsic motivation—help offenders engage in treatment.

3. Target interventions.

a. Risk Principle: Prioritize supervision and treatment resources for higher risk offenders.

b. Need Principle: Target interventions to criminogenic needs.

c. Responsivity Principle: Be responsive to temperament, learning style, motivation, culture, and gender when assigning programs.

d. Dosage: Structure 40-70% of high-risk offenders’ time for 3-9 months.

e. Treatment: Integrate treatment into the full sentence/sanction requirements.

4. Skill train with directed practice (use cognitive behavioral treatment methods).

5. Increase positive reinforcement (4 positive for every negative sanction).

6. Engage ongoing support in natural communities.

# 7. Measure relevant processes/practices.8. Provide measurement feedback: Client outcomes and quality of service

delivery

National Institute

of Correcti

ons nicic.org

Example

EBP #1Assess offender needs and risk levels

Example: Colorado Actuarial Risk Assessment Scale for Parole Release

Risk Level

Probability of

recidivism

% of DOC population

Very low 18% 11%Low 24% 17%Medium 33% 15%High 45% 23%Very High 77% 33%

Legislation 2010HB 10-1352

Controlled Substance and Marijuana Penalties

Rep. Waller Sen. Steadman

HB 10-1360Parole Placement for Technical Violation

Rep. Pace Sen. Steadman

HB 10-1374Parole Changes Evidence-Based Practices

Rep. Ferrandino Sen. Penry

Challenge

Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices (EBP) to reduce recidivism

•Changing organizational culture• Parole Board• Technical Violations Parole Officer

•Introductory training all disciplines and levels of management•Ongoing training for line staff•Ongoing evaluation (research) to ensure implementation

Challenge: Changing organizational cultures to implement EBP#7. Measure relevant processes and practices. •What data is collected regarding inmate/offender assessment and case management?•Is the information reliable? Is it adequate to answer questions about adhering to evidence based practices?•Is the information easily retrievable so that managing staff can review their efforts?•How are incremental inmate/offender changes measured while they are incarcerated and under supervision?•What are the outcome measures and how are they tracked?•Are staff performance evaluations based on use of evidence based practices and successful supervision techniques? How is staff performance measured? What data is used? How is that data collected? How is it used to provide feedback to the parole officer or case manager?•When practices are not well implemented, what is the approach for improvement?

 

National Institute of Corrections nicic.org

RecommendationsResources for training and research are

cut during budget reductionsDecisions need to be linked to both

research and public expendituresNeed to develop research-based

performance measuresCommon goal: recidivism reductionAlternatives to incarceration for

appropriate offenders$32,000 (cost of one year in prison) can

provide significant resources in the community: substance abuse treatment, housing, transportation, supervision costs