Upload
miles-bell
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
OutlineOutline
Organizational StructureOrganizational Structure Probation population breakdownProbation population breakdown Evidence Based Practices in Evidence Based Practices in
ProbationProbation Probation RevocationsProbation Revocations Specialized Caseloads and Problem Specialized Caseloads and Problem
Solving CourtsSolving Courts
Harold “Bud” DoughtyAssociate Commissioner for
Adult Services
Probation Region I
Lisa Nash, Regional Corrections Administrator
Probation Region II
Nancy Downs, RegionalCorrections Administrator
Probation Region IV
Charles O’Roake, Regional Corrections Administrator
Probation Region III
Dan Ouelette, Regional Corrections Administrator
RegionalRegional OrganizationOrganization
Regional Corrections Administrator (RCA)
Probation Officer Probation Officer Probation Officer Probation Officer
Asst. Regional CorrectionsAdministrator
Corrections Resource Coordinator
(Regions I & III)
74 Probation Officers Statewide
Caseload & Offender DataCaseload & Offender Data
74 Probation Officers74 Probation Officers Average caseload size is 97 total / Average caseload size is 97 total /
84 Active*84 Active* 7628 offenders total; 6324 active7628 offenders total; 6324 active
* * *Average includes smaller specialized caseloads *Average includes smaller specialized caseloads and assumes no vacanciesand assumes no vacancies
Active Probation Population (6324 Active Probation Population (6324 total)total)
4993
11
535
159612 14
Probation
Parole
Pending ViolationIncarcerated
Interstate In
Pending ViolationCommunity
SCCP
Statewide Gender BreakdownStatewide Gender Breakdown
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Region I(19%)
Region II(16%)
Region III(18%)
Region IV(20%)
Percent of Female Offenders
Total
Female
Changing Strategies/Practices to Changing Strategies/Practices to Achieve Same Goal… Public SafetyAchieve Same Goal… Public Safety
Still pursuing Public Safety but a wide body Still pursuing Public Safety but a wide body of research/evidence now supports different of research/evidence now supports different approach to achieve public safety.approach to achieve public safety.
Doing “What Works” and supported by Doing “What Works” and supported by research to achieve public safety by research to achieve public safety by reducing recidivism)reducing recidivism)
Small reductions of risk across a broadscale Small reductions of risk across a broadscale of offenders. of offenders.
Examples of Evidence Based Examples of Evidence Based Practices in ProbationPractices in Probation
Identification of Risk by AssessmentIdentification of Risk by Assessment Vary supervision intensity, Vary supervision intensity,
programming, and strategy by programming, and strategy by identify risks and needsidentify risks and needs
Use Motivational InterviewingUse Motivational Interviewing Formalized case planningFormalized case planning Quality AssuranceQuality Assurance
Identification of Risk by AssessmentIdentification of Risk by Assessment
Level of Service Inventory –Revised(LSI-R)Level of Service Inventory –Revised(LSI-R) (Andrew,Bonta)(Andrew,Bonta)
Perhaps the most widely used offender Perhaps the most widely used offender assessment instrument:assessment instrument:
A 1999 national study found that 14% of agencies surveyed A 1999 national study found that 14% of agencies surveyed were using the LSI-R and another 6% had plans to were using the LSI-R and another 6% had plans to implement its use. implement its use.
Jones, D.A., Johnson, S., Latessa, E.J., and Travis, L.F. (1999). Case classification Jones, D.A., Johnson, S., Latessa, E.J., and Travis, L.F. (1999). Case classification in community corrections: Preliminary findings from a national survey. in community corrections: Preliminary findings from a national survey. Topics in Community Corrections. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Topics in Community Corrections. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Corrections, U.S. Dept. of Justice.Corrections, U.S. Dept. of Justice.
LSI-RLSI-R
Perhaps the most researched correctional Perhaps the most researched correctional risk/needs assessmentrisk/needs assessment
Since the first validation in 1982 it has Since the first validation in 1982 it has continued to show predictive validity. continued to show predictive validity.
Andrews, D.A. (1982). The Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI): the Andrews, D.A. (1982). The Level of Supervision Inventory (LSI): the first follow-up: Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Servicesfirst follow-up: Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Correctional Services
Andrews, D.A., Dowden, C. and Gendreau, P. (1999). Clinically Andrews, D.A., Dowden, C. and Gendreau, P. (1999). Clinically relevant and psychologically informed approaches to reduced re-relevant and psychologically informed approaches to reduced re-offending: A meta-analytic study of human service, risk, need, offending: A meta-analytic study of human service, risk, need, responsivity and other concerns in justice contexts. Ottawa: responsivity and other concerns in justice contexts. Ottawa: Carleton UniversityCarleton University
Population Breakdown by RiskPopulation Breakdown by Risk
Risk: Defined as likelihood of recidivating as Risk: Defined as likelihood of recidivating as defined by the Level of Service Inventory –defined by the Level of Service Inventory –Revised(LSI-R)Revised(LSI-R)
Categories:Categories:Administrative (0-13)Administrative (0-13)Low (14-20)Low (14-20)Moderate (21-25)Moderate (21-25)HighHigh (26-34)(26-34)Maximum (35-50)Maximum (35-50)
Statewide Risk BreakdownStatewide Risk Breakdown
Statewide Risk Breakdown13%
26%
37%
12%
2%10%
Admin 13% Low 26%Mod 37% High 12%Max 2% Unassessed 10%
Population Breakdown by RiskPopulation Breakdown by Risk
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Reg I Reg II Reg III Reg IV StateAvg
Populations by LSI-R Risk
Admin Low Mod High Max Unassessed
Probation RevocationsProbation Revocations
Account for a significant percentage Account for a significant percentage of DOC and County Jail incarcerationsof DOC and County Jail incarcerations
A significant percentage of probation A significant percentage of probation revocations are the result of revocations are the result of technical violationstechnical violations
What influences revocation What influences revocation decisions?decisions?
RiskRisk Probation OfficersProbation Officers District AttorneysDistrict Attorneys JudgesJudges Severity and/or number of violationsSeverity and/or number of violations Victim impactVictim impact
Revocation Reduction MeasuresRevocation Reduction Measures
Directive requiring supervisory review of cases Directive requiring supervisory review of cases with pending violations where revocations in with pending violations where revocations in excess of 90 days being sought. excess of 90 days being sought.
Pilot program in York County where LSI-R risk level Pilot program in York County where LSI-R risk level and case history is being provided directly to the and case history is being provided directly to the court for all probation violations. court for all probation violations.
Plans for the creation of a “Technical Violations Plans for the creation of a “Technical Violations Unit” and/or a “Probation Re-entry Program” Unit” and/or a “Probation Re-entry Program” modeled after successful programs in Connecticut.modeled after successful programs in Connecticut.
Problem-Solving CourtsProblem-Solving Courts
Courts taking innovative approaches with specific Courts taking innovative approaches with specific problems that cause criminal behavior such as problems that cause criminal behavior such as substance abuse, mental health, and domestic substance abuse, mental health, and domestic violence. Problem solving courts in Maine include:violence. Problem solving courts in Maine include:
Drug CourtDrug CourtMental Health CourtMental Health Court
Judicial Monitoring for Domestic Judicial Monitoring for Domestic Violence OffendersViolence Offenders
Specialist CaseloadsSpecialist Caseloads
Domestic Violence Specialist Caseloads Domestic Violence Specialist Caseloads (York and Cumberland Counties)(York and Cumberland Counties)
Sex Offender Specialist Caseloads – in Sex Offender Specialist Caseloads – in all 4 probation regionsall 4 probation regions
Supervised Community Confinement*Supervised Community Confinement**specialist caseloads in some areas*specialist caseloads in some areas