Vera

In the 1990s the Multnomah County, Oregon, Department of Community Justice (DCJ) initiated a series of evidence-based reforms. As part of this effort, DCJ officials asked the Vera Institute to examine how the county uses intermediate sanctions when people violate the conditions of their probation or post-prison supervision. This brief provides an overview of our key findings.

With support from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (part of the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs), the Center on Sentencing and Corrections at
the Vera Institute of Justice conducted a nationwide review of current sex offender laws, policies, and trends. This report represents the results of that systemic
analysis.

This report provides an overview and analysis of existing treatment and reentry
practices for sex offenders who are involved with the criminal justice system.

Little empirical study had been done to confirm or refute the effectiveness of incarceration in reducing crime rates when America began its historic reliance on prisons in the 1970s. Today, conversely, policymakers are faced with a large, complex, and sometimes contradictory body of research. This paper seeks to help officials make sense of this information and offers an up-to-date understanding of what works best. It also examines research on several of the other factors that might be developed as part of an expanded notion of public safety. Informed by this more inclusive understanding of current research, it suggests that effective public safety strategies should move away from an exclusive focus on incarceration to embrace other factors associated with low crime rates in a more comprehensive policy framework for safeguarding citizens.

This report presents research findings about Project Greenlight, an ambitious prison-based reentry demonstration project that the Vera Institute of Justice conducted at the Queensboro Correctional Facility in Queens, New York, from February 2002 to February 2003.

Drawing upon research literature and demonstrated best practices, Greenlight sought to reduce recidivism among soon-to-be-released men by working with corrections and parole staff to address a spectrum of reentry issues during the last 60 days in prison. Despite these efforts, however, Vera researchers found that arrest rates among Greenlight's 348 participants were higher than those of two different comparison groups.

While disappointing, these findings present the field of prison reentry with a valuable learning opportunity. The technical and summary reports are supplemented by an edited transcript of an April 2005 roundtable discussion about the project that was attended by prominent researchers, expert practitioners, and former Greenlight and select Vera staff. The edited transcript covers many issues that could have factored into the disappointing outcomes and presents lessons for current and future programs that are designed to reduce recidivism and improve outcomes for men and women returning to the community from prison.

....................................................

"The Greenlight study is an important first step in understanding the dynamics of prisoner reentry. It points out the difficulty of separating the many variables that affect outcomes and the need to work more intensively in pursuit of effective reentry strategies."
—Martin F. Horn, New York City Commissioner of Correction and Probation

This publication combines two parts: A roundtable discussion (13 pages) and a summary report (15 pages). We are also publishing a technical report (155 pages) that supplements this publication, introduced by the roundtable discussion. You may download the roundtable discussion by itself.

Can community supervision compete with incarceration as a means of crime control? Mark Kleiman, professor of policy studies at the UCLA School of Public Affairs and the author of "When Brute Force Fails: Strategic Thinking for Crime Control," believes it can. At a July 2005 roundtable discussion sponsored by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Kleiman told a group of researchers and prominent community supervision administrators, "If we get [community supervision] right, we could cut incarceration by 50 percent, have less crime rather than more crime, and spend the same amount of money." This paper, produced by the Vera Institute of Justice with support from NIJ, summarizes the discussion between Kleiman, who has proposed a new model of community corrections based on his theoretical work, and his audience of researchers and community corrections administrators, who represent a wealth of practical experience.

In recent years, New York City has experienced unprecedented growth in the size and diversity of its immigrant population. As a result, a significant proportion of city residents have limited English proficiency or do not speak English at all. Finding ways to overcome language barriers is an emerging field, and New York City criminal and juvenile justice agencies have made great strides in addressing the needs of people with limited English proficiency. To help these agencies continue to develop cost-effective strategies for tackling language barriers, staff from the Vera Institute of Justice spoke with agencies and organizations locally and across the nation to discuss ways in which they have improved access to services for people with limited English proficiency. The resulting report, Translating Justice, is a summary of diverse efforts to bridge the language gap. It is intended as a guide for New York City criminal and juvenile justice agencies, which includes language access planning; translation of written communications; using bilingual employees; using professional interpreters; pooling resources; and using technology to overcome language barriers.

Early this year, in an expected but nonetheless momentous decision, the Supreme Court held that the federal sentencing guidelines are unconstitutional. United States v. Booker closely follows a ruling from last summer, Blakely v. Washington, which threw out that state's guidelines and sent the criminal justice systems in perhaps half of the states into a state of unrest. The new decision provides some assistance to state policymakers and practitioners who had been hoping for clarity in the post-Blakely world. But it is now clear that the bulk of the unanswered questions are in the hands of the state courts to resolve. This report, the third to address Blakely concerns for the states, examines the issues addressed by Booker and notes some that are left hanging.

Few Supreme Court decisions have engendered as much uncertainty in state and federal courts as Blakely v. Washington. This report, the second in a series on the practical implications of the ruling, examines the legal issues raised by Blakely and prior related decisions. The Court found that under the Sixth Amendment a judge cannot increase a criminal sentence based on facts not proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt (or admitted by the defendant). This report is intended as a primer for those charged with responding to Blakely.

People leaving prison often turn to their families for assistance. These families become the "front line" of reentry, providing people coming home with critical emotional and material support. But criminal justice systems have only recently begun to engage families in the transition. This Issue in Brief examines the trend towards providing family-focused reentry programming in prison and in the community, highlights ways that jurisdictions can and are structuring such efforts, and addresses the challenges involved. As an example of programming that engages family in reentry, the paper discusses the family reintegration program of Project Greenlight, a prison-based pilot program operated by Vera in partnership with the New York State Department of Correctional Services and the New York State Division of Parole.

This summer, the Supreme Court sent the criminal justice systems in perhaps half of the states, and the federal system, into a state of simmering unrest. Blakely v. Washington cast doubt on two decades of efforts to channel judicial discretion in sentencing by finding that the Sixth Amendment forbids a judge to increase a criminal sentence based on facts not found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, even when those sentences are well short of statutory maximums. This report offers an examination of which state systems are affected and the options available to policymakers in affected states.

Departures from the nearly sacrosanct tough-on-crime corrections policies of previous decades continue as states grapple with ongoing budget shortfalls. Some evidence suggests, however, that a growing acceptance of alternative corrections policies may be more influential in the shifts than generally recognized. This Issue in Brief surveys the most recent changes to sentencing and corrections policies and identifies the range of reforms being implemented. Using case studies of changes in four states, it also explores the role of changing attitudes toward crime and the possibility that the shifts in policy may outlast the budget crises that precipitated them.

Every day, people are released from prisons across the country and many of them do not have a place to live. Policymakers and practitioners are beginning to pay attention to this issue and have developed at least three main approaches: prohibiting inmates from leaving prison without a place to live; providing housing as part of services to help ex-offenders stay sober or get a job; or providing comprehensive transitional services, including housing. Through a partnership with the New York State Department of Correctional Services and the New York State Division of Parole, Vera implemented the latter approach in a pilot program called Project Greenlight. This installment of Vera's Issues in Brief series discusses homelessness among returning prisoners, the implications it has for government agencies, and examples of corrections agencies' approaches to the problem. It also details Project Greenlight's housing assistance program and outlines insights from Greenlight's experience for practitioners who are facing a similar problem.

Produced by a team of researchers at the Vera Institute, this guide to the design of performance indicators is written for government officials and program managers around the world who want to improve the delivery of safety, security, and access to justice. In plain language, the Guide describes how to develop practical and effective indicators in both data-poor and data-rich environments, starting with the desired outcome. Specific chapters explore the role of indicators in measuring progress in the safety and justice sector as a whole, within specific state institutions ranging from law enforcement to prisons, and among the wide variety of non-state justice institutions. Each chapter:

• Describes traditional indicators used to measure performance across the justice sector or within a particular institution
• Provides examples of specific policy goals that require new indicators
• Suggests innovative indicators capable of reflecting progress towards those goals and possible sources of data
• Discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the suggested indicators

The Guide was produced with funding from the British Department for International Development (DFID) in partnership with staff of DFID's program on Safety, Security and Accessible Justice, which operates in countries as different and far flung as Bangladesh, Jordan, and Malawi. The reform of justice systems and objective indicators of that reform are essential to improving life for ordinary people, particularly the world's poorest citizens. Vera hopes the Guide will stimulate and aid that process.

Extended Willard is a New York State entry in the growing number of programs that emphasize treatment rather than long prison sentences for nonviolent substance-abusing offenders. This report on the implementation of the three-phase, 15-month Extended Willard pilot program evaluates enrollment, completion rates for participants, and the way that criminal justice agencies and non-governmental treatment providers work together to run the program. Results show that creation of new sentencing options may not be sufficient to change sentencing practices. Although about half of those sentenced to Extended Willard completed the program successfully, courts sent less than one-fifth of those with eligible criminal records to the program, sending most to prison instead.

In spring 2003, state legislatures faced with the worst budget crises in a generation scrambled for ways to cut corrections spending without jeopardizing public safety and confidence. In cooperation with the National Conference of State Legislatures, Vera's State Sentencing and Corrections Program brought together a diverse, bipartisan group of state representatives and senators with experience and interest in corrections and sentencing policy to talk about the impact of the budget crisis on criminal justice policies. Their wide-ranging conversation, summarized in this report, revealed how in some states partisan politics is taking a back seat to efforts to save money and produce better outcomes through increased attention to rehabilitation and prevention.

The Network Program of the private nonprofit Episcopal Social Services provides therapeutic community services within New York State correctional and work-release facilities. This study examines how the program successfully integrated itself into the corrections environment by taking steps to gain buy-in from prison officials and staff. It also uncovers differences between the prison and work-release portions of the program. In the former, it found that the ESS network program attracted predominantly African-American offenders with long sentences, suggesting that participants use the therapeutic community to create a more supportive, less violent prison experience. The work release portion of the program adhered more closely to the ESS’ stated goal of providing training for re-entry. The decision to include family members in the therapeutic community was found to be a potentially significant innovation as it held promise for extending the therapeutic community’s benefits beyond the initial re-entry period.

Across the country, state lawmakers and corrections officials are facing the most severe spending cuts in a decade. Closing prisons, laying off correction officers, and eliminating education and drug-treatment programs may save funds in the short term, but they do not address how resources can be best managed over the long term. This Issue in Brief from Vera's State Sentencing and Corrections Program shows how some states have seized the opportunity presented by changed public attitudes toward crime and incarceration to deploy innovative tools such as structured sentencing, simulation models, and risk assessment at sentencing to enhance stability in their justice systems and save money.

Like other cities across the United States, New York is gradually increasing its use of alternatives to incarceration (or ATIs) for felony offenders. The city contracts with ten nonprofit agencies that operate their own programs and has sent these agencies about 3,000 felony offenders each year since 1997. In preparing this study, which was commissioned by the New York City Council, Vera researchers interviewed felony offenders in nine of the ten programs, along with judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and program staff, and examined recidivism rates for participating offenders. The report shows that offenders sent to ATIs re-offended at the same rate as a matched comparison group who spent more time in prison. Serious offenders, then, can be sent to rigorous community programs rather than jail without an increased risk to the public. The report suggests that the ATI system can further reduce recidivism by dealing more promptly with offenders who violate program rules and by increasing completion rates.

The Manhattan Misdemeanor Treatment Court is the only one of five treatment courts in New York City to solely target misdemeanor offenders. Based on a review of court documents and interviews with judges, attorneys, treatment providers, and offenders, this report concludes that the court successfully implemented a collaborative approach to screen, assess, and monitor people in treatment. But more than three-quarters of its participants said cocaine or heroin was their drug of choice, suggesting that severity of addiction is not correlated with severity of offending among this group. Because participants' treatment needs are greater than anticipated, the court must confront the limits of the treatment it offers. The court was most successful with defendants who had the least number of prior convictions and the shortest treatment assignments.