Supportive Services that Reduce Recidivism in Ex-Felons

Amber Valdez

University of Colorado, Denver

School of Public Affairs

Professor Pamela Medina, Ph.D.

PUAD 5361 - Capstone Project

Prepared for Housing Colorado

Executive Director, Sara Reynolds

1

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3

Background Information ............................................................................................................. 3 Project Purpose ........................................................................................................................... 4 Organizational Information ......................................................................................................... 4

Literature Review ......................................................................................................................... 5 Obstacles for Re-entry ................................................................................................................ 5

Employment .................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Family Reunification .................................................................................................................................................... 7 Technical Parole Violations ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Colorado Housing Market .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Racial Disparities ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 Mental Illness ................................................................................................................................................................ 12

Existing Government Programs that assist with Re-entry ........................................................ 13 Federal Interagency Re-entry Council ................................................................................................................ 13 Project Reunite ............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Colorado Second Chance Housing and Re-entry Program ......................................................................... 14 Denver Community Re-entry Program .............................................................................................................. 17

Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 18 Interviews ...................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Literature Review ....................................................................................................................................................... 20

Results .......................................................................................................................................... 20 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 21

Low Income Housing Tax Credit ............................................................................................. 22 Re-entry Programs in Correctional Facilities ........................................................................... 23 Non-profits Providing Low Income Housing ........................................................................... 24 Private Landlords Renting to People with Criminal Records ................................................... 25

References .................................................................................................................................... 27 Appendices ................................................................................................................................... 31

Appendix 1 ................................................................................................................................ 31 Interview Summaries ................................................................................................................................................ 31

Appendix 2 ................................................................................................................................ 36 Interview Main Topics .............................................................................................................................................. 36

Appendix 3 ................................................................................................................................ 37 Fact Sheet ....................................................................................................................................................................... 37

2

Executive Summary

This project evaluates the impact of homelessness and lack of affordable housing on the

recidivism rate of people convicted of crimes in Colorado. This evaluation was conducted in

order to assist Housing Colorado, in its efforts to help its members with advocacy and education

of the issue.

While initial appearances are that someone with a criminal history lacks the resources

necessary to find supportive programs to avoid recidivism, several programs are in existence.

These programs have the high potential to have a positive impact on individual lives, the

recidivism rate, and serve as a model for other programs.

Research across the United States and local Colorado experts identify commonalities

amongst the impact of homelessness and the lack of affordable housing on an ex-felon’s ability

to successfully reintegrate into communities upon release from prison. Many factors impact a

parolee’s ability to obtain housing including a landlord’s willingness to provide housing, ability

to obtain gainful employment, and receive individualized supportive services. Success is

predicated on the premise that housing alone (though effective) will not provide a solution and

that the parolee must be viewed in a holistic approach, one that addresses his or her need for

housing, treatment, employment, and other solutions.

3

Introduction

Background Information

With incarceration rates and associated costs on the rise, many organizations are looking

for solutions to keep people out of prison and productive members of society. By the end of

2015, it is estimated that Colorado will have about 21,000 people in prison (OSPB, 2015).

Colorado's prison population nearly doubled in the 1990s and then nearly doubled again in the

2000s (Przybylski, 2008). Colorado had a three-year recidivism rate of 49 percent in 2010, which

dropped three percent from 2007. In June 2014, the federal register found that the annual cost to

incarcerate a federal inmate is $28,893.40 (DOJ, 2013). Colorado rates are slightly higher at

$30,374 to house an inmate annually (DOC, 2015). The Colorado Department of Corrections

budget is $755 million, up from $70 million in 1985 (CCJRC, 2015).

Over 10,000 ex-prisoners are released from state and federal prisons every week and

more than 650,000 ex-offenders are released from prison every year nationally (DOJ, 2015). In

Colorado, close to 10,000 parolees will be released annually (DOC, 2013). Many of those newly

released are not prepared for the challenges they face once they get out.

After being released from prison, parolees need to secure steady work, pay for mandatory

drug tests and classes, find housing, and secure transportation for their daily needs. Those newly

released have consistently named finding housing and employment as the two most difficult

challenges for re-entry. 72 percent of those that do go back to prison, do not go back because

they commit a new crime but because they violate simple technical rules (Piton, 2007).

According to a memo from the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections,

people who are released from prison in Colorado are given $100, which is expected to last until

4

their first paycheck (DOC, 2011). In some jurisdictions they are also given a backpack with

minimal necessities to give a little extra help.

Project Purpose

Ex-felons face many barriers when leaving prison. This paper will explore what some of

the tangible barriers are to re-entry and how they can lead to troubles with finding stable

housing. This paper will address through literature review how these issues can lead ex-felons on

a path back to prison if they cannot overcome them.

More than one-third of parolees in Denver end up at homeless shelters (Piton, 2007). This

paper will explore some of the services that currently exist in the federal, state, and local levels

that can get these parolees off the streets and into stable housing. Housing programs and

resources for those with criminal histories that have been identified through interviews and

research will be presented.

The previously incarcerated may be disadvantaged in the legitimate labor market, their

experiences behind bars may actually increase their employability in illegitimate enterprises

(Hannon, 2010). However, it is advantageous for society when people are out of the prison

system, living with their families, and working in good jobs. While there can be greater

implications to society for someone going back to prison. The client, Housing Colorado, is

interested in having a resource for their members to guide others in understanding the importance

of affordable housing especially relating to ex-felons.

Organizational Information

Housing Colorado is a membership-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit. They represent most

sectors of the affordable housing community namely: real estate agents, developers, designers,

investors, accountants, property managers, public and nonprofit housing agencies, finance

5

professionals, construction firms, and human service agencies. Housing Colorado promotes the

preservation and production of quality affordable housing in all parts of Colorado through

statewide education and advocacy.

Housing Colorado has three strategic pillars: engage Housing Colorado membership and

partners in developing successful legislation, develop and implement a communications plan to

support success of legislation, and develop and implement an annual business plan that sustains

Housing Colorado and supports successful legislation (Housing Colorado, 2015). Housing

Colorado is committed to ensuring all Coloradans with low to moderate income are able to find

housing, which includes those with criminal histories.

Housing Colorado can benefit from this research paper to use as a resource for their

members who would like to serve and understand the population of ex-felons. This can also be

used as a resource for the client when they are making state and local policy in the future. This

study will ask the questions:

• What are the problems ex-felons are facing with re-entry?

• What programs currently exist that help ex-felons get into stable housing?

• Where are there potential areas for growth in Colorado to help this population get into housing?

Literature Review

Obstacles for Re-entry

Employment

Finding and keeping a job is the number one problem identified by people released from

prison. Parolees cite lack of identification papers and driver’s licenses, employers’ reluctance to

hire people with criminal records, and expenses associated with their parole as major work-

6

related barriers (Piton, 2007). In a survey conducted by Harry Holzer, he found that only one-

third of employers in his multi-city survey would consider hiring an applicant with a criminal

record (Hannon, 2010).

Even prior to incarceration, the employment rates of those involved in criminal activities

generally lag well behind those of their peers, including who had similarly limited skills and also

lived in poor inner-city neighborhoods (Holzer, 2003). While serving a prison sentence, that

individual is out of the job market for months and sometimes years at a time. This puts them

further behind with not only their experience but possible workplace skills that could have been

gained. This time away could also hurt their networking potential that they would otherwise gain

being in a professional setting.

In addition to facing problems getting employment because of a criminal record, research

shows that this population can have problems getting hired because of a lack of education. This

population does not tend to pursue education even before they have a criminal record; about 70

percent of offenders and ex-offenders are high school dropouts (Holzer, 2003). Education is not

only beneficial for employment opportunities but also for keeping people out of the prison

system.

Research shows that a strong tie to meaningful employment is one of the most important

elements that leads to less offending (Przybylski, 2008). When vocational programs are offered

at prison facilities, prisoners are allowed to seek certification in occupational fields that interest

them. After they are released this can make them more attractive to potential employers and give

them the skill set they need to gain employment.

A bipartisan group of Congressmen brought forth The Fair Chance Act in September of

2015 (Katz, 2015), which would restrict federal agencies and contractors from asking about

7

applicants’ criminal history until a conditional job offer has been made. Many states and cities

have already stopped the practice of requiring individuals to indicate up front if they have past

felonies on their records and this would be an expansion on the federal level to encourage

individuals to seek federal employment. Exemptions would be in place for positions related to

law enforcement and national security, jobs that require access to classified information and

posts statutorily required to employ only individuals with clean records would be exempt from

the ban (Katz, 2015).

Family Reunification

Reunification with family can be crucial in success of re-entry but many obstacles (such

as public housing rules and parole conditions) can make it difficult for families to live together.

Seventy to eighty percent of women in prison are mothers who had an average of 2.5 children

under the age of 18 living with them prior to their arrest (CCJRC, 2010). An additional six

percent of women enter prison pregnant (CCJRC, 2010). About 55 percent of men in prison are

fathers with children under the age of eighteen, which is lower but still significant (CCJRC,

2010).

Prisoners anticipating release acknowledged how important families can be avoiding

recidivism but indicate that they did not fully realize how important this is until they were back

in the community for a few months (Foster, 2009). Twenty-six percent identified support from

family as the most important thing that kept them out of prison and an additional nine percent

named seeing their children (Foster, 2009). The factors they had anticipated as being most

influential before release (such as employment, housing, and drug use), were viewed as much

less important after release (Foster, 2009).

8

The above holds especially true when looking at what motivates certain populations to

stay out of jail. Latino fathers lived with their children 51 percent of the time before they entered

prison and 67 percent expected to live with their children when released (Foster, 2009). White

mothers had a similar rate of 51 percent living with their children before entering prison but a

slightly higher 72 percent hoped to live with their children after (Foster, 2009). Latino and Black

mothers lived with their children 61 percent and 63 percent, respectively, of the time before they

entered prison but a high percentage of 78 percent wanted to live with their children when they

left prison (Foster, 2009). White fathers only lived with their children 36 percent of the time

before entering prison and had the lowest percentage who believed they would live with their

children after prison at 49 percent (Foster, 2009). Black fathers were the least likely to live with

their children at 32 percent but a significantly higher amount of 54 percent would like to live

with their children post-release from prison (Foster, 2009)

At the urging of President Barack Obama, many public housing authorities (PHAs) have

updated their screening criteria for new applicants and additions to the lease. Some PHAs have

reworked their screening processes to be more comprehensive using a range of criteria for

evaluating prospective applicants with conviction histories. Many PHAs are implementing “fair-

chance” ordinances for people applying for housing. Rather than automatically denying an

application for a person with a criminal history, individual assessments that consider directly-

related convictions only, time since conviction, and evidence of rehabilitation are conducted.

Technical Parole Violations

The United States Bureau of Justice defines parole as a period of conditional supervised

release in the community following a prison term (BJS, 2015). It includes parolees released

through discretionary or mandatory supervised release from prison, those released through other

9

types of post-custody conditional supervision, and those sentenced to a term of supervised

release. In Colorado, there are nine standard conditions of parole including but not limited to:

reporting to a parole officer, living at their residence on record, obeying every federal, state, and

municipal law, not associating with anyone with a criminal record, finding a job or full-time

educational program, not abusing alcohol or using drugs, and paying child support if ordered. In

addition to the standard conditions, there are 20 additional conditions that can be added to a

parole agreement by the parole board (Donner, 2013).

According to the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice Correctional Population

Forecasts (2010), parole returns due to technical violations have steadily increased over the past

four years. In Denver, crime has decreased in many categories but incarceration has increased

due to those who have been sent back to prison because of technical violations. Comparing 2014

to 2013, crimes against persons were down in every category except simple assault and

intimidation and crimes against property were down overall (City and County of Denver, 2014).

Colorado Housing Market

Metro Denver apartment rents averaged just above $800 a month in 2000 and were still

close to that level in 2007, in part because so many renters purchased homes. But in the second

quarter of 2015, the average apartment rent in metro Denver was $1,265, a jump of more than 50

percent, according to the Apartment Association of Metro Denver (Svaldi, 2015). In Denver,

residents must earn at least $35 an hour just to comfortably afford a median-priced rental in the

city, according to a December 2014 Zillow study (Svaldi, 2015).

The Colorado housing crisis is not only affecting the very low-income citizens, it also

impacts families, children, and seniors. The Governor’s Office estimates that 5,800 additional

10

supportive homeless housing units, above those currently available and being developed are

required to meet the needs of Colorado’s homeless families and individuals (CHFA, 2015).

“Rent burden” is considered spending more than 30 percent of household income on rent.

In Colorado, over 325,000 households are defined rent burdened and of those, over 165,000 or

eight percent are paying far more than 50 percent of their income on housing costs (Live

Affordably, 2015).

In a market that can be tough for renters to find an affordable unit, it is especially tough

for those with criminal backgrounds. Landlords in Denver now have the opportunity to be more

selective in whom they rent their units to. Many landlords are choosing not to accept Section 8

housing vouchers because they can get much higher value in the open market. There are also

misconceptions about what it means to rent to those with a criminal history. Many landlords

believe they will be an unreliable tenant who will not respect their property and may not realize

that parole officers and housing programs (like Housing First in Colorado Coalition for the

Homeless) will work with them through their transition.

Racial Disparities

In Colorado, the amount of incarceration per race is not equivalent per capita. Latinos

account for about 21 percent of the population in Colorado but 33.6 percent of the state prison

population (Gonzalez, A., 2014). Blacks are 4.3 percent of overall population and a major 20

percent (Gonzalez, A., 2014). Whites are 73 percent of the overall population and 47 percent of

the prison population (Gonzalez, A., 2014). This is not unique to Colorado, in the United States

Blacks are incarcerated at 5.6 times, and Latinos 1.8 times, the rate of Whites (Garland, 2008).

Blacks and Latinos are much more likely to be imprisoned for drug offenses (Garland,

2008). In Colorado, 69 percent of people in prison for drug offenses are people of color (CCJRC,

11

2015). Twenty-two percent of all people sent to prison in Colorado were convicted of a drug

offense, which is the most common of all crime committed (CCJRC, 2010). From 1983 to 1993,

the drug offender incarceration grew by over 500 percent nationally and Blacks and Latinos

make up the vast majority of that growth (Garland, 2008).

Minority students in Colorado are not graduating high school at the same rates as their

White counterparts. White students are graduating from high school at an impressive rate of 95.4

percent but Black students are only graduating at a rate of 86 percent, while Latino students fall

even further behind with a graduation rate of 65 percent (Hubbard, 2015). Each extra year a

student stays in school can result in a lower probability that the person will go to jail. One extra

year of schooling results in a .10 percentage point reduction in the probability of incarceration

for Whites, and a .37 percentage point reduction for Blacks (Lochner, 2003).

Men with some college experience only go to jail 11.5 percent of time and only two

percent who have a college degree have been incarcerated, whereas those who drop out of high

school see rates as high as 36.3 percent (Ewert, 2011). College graduation rates in Colorado are

not equitable. White students will graduate with a college degree 42.5 percent of the time, that

number falls to 19.5 percent for Black students, and Latino students are far behind with only 12

percent graduating from college (Hubbard, 2015).

The current trends relating to lack of education and increased drug incarceration for

minorities does not bode well for future generations. The odds of a male born in 2001 going to

prison is 1 in 3 for Blacks, 1 in 6 for Latinos, and 1 in 17 for Whites. In July of 2015 President

Obama announced that Pell grants would be available for certain state and federal prisoners

(Johnson, 2015). Pell grants are federal financial aid that does not need to be paid back, Congress

blocked prisoners from receiving Pell grants in 1994. The Pell grants will allow prisoners to go

12

to school while they serve their time. Low-income students qualify for Pell grants. Studies show

that inmates who participate in correctional education have a 43 percent lower chance of

recidivating than inmates who did not (Davis, 2015).

Mental Illness

It has been widely studied and discovered that mental health disorders among prisoners

have consistently exceeded rates of such disorders in the general population (Gonzalez, J., 2014)

In a study performed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse - National Institutes of Health, as

many as 16 percent of state prison inmates and 16 percent of probationers experienced either a

mental condition or an overnight stay in a mental hospital during their lifetimes (DOLA, 2014).

Of those who are found to have a mental condition, only about 18 percent have been on

medication for treatment before they entered prison (Gonzalez, J., 2014).

Because of the large number of people who enter into the prison system with mental

health disorders, correctional facilities in the United States are often considered to be the largest

provider of mental health services (Gonzalez, J., 2014). Despite the fact that many need these

services and that the courts try to mandate adequate care, not all prisons offer services to every

prisoner who needs it. A national study by the Health and Human Services completed in 2000

revealed that 45 percent of state prisons and 68 percent of jails had no substance abuse treatment

of any kind (CU study). Among those who have been previously incarcerated, the rates of

recidivism are between 50 percent and 230 percent higher for persons with mental health

conditions than for those without any mental health conditions, regardless of the diagnosis

(Gonzalez, J., 2014).

Ninety percent of women who were assessed in prison were in need of substance abuse

treatment (CCJRC, 2015). Maternal roles appear to be a motivating factor for female offenders to

13

participate in correctional substance abuse treatment if that treatment will not delay family

reunification. Upon release from prison, however, a dichotomy emerges in that maternal role

responsibilities may conflict with women’s continued treatment even while serving as a

motivation for achieving sobriety (Robbins, 2009).

Women, especially Black women, described their mothering roles as a primary

motivation for wanting to quit the addict role. Their first doubts about their substance abuse were

often prompted by problems in meeting their parental responsibilities and their fears that their

children would be taken away from them (Robbins, 2009).

Existing Government Programs that assist with Re-entry

Federal Interagency Re-entry Council

Barack Obama campaigned in 2008 on a promise that he would work to reduce the

recidivism rate. In 2011, President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder established the

Federal Interagency Re-entry Council (FIRC) to coordinate federal efforts and resources and

help eliminate the barriers to recovery and stability that many offenders face when they are

released (CSGJC, 2015). The FIRC represents 20 federal agencies and the chief focus of the

FIRC is to remove federal barriers to successful re-entry (CSGJC, 2015).

Project Reunite

Project Reunite supports the successful reunification of formerly incarcerated or

chronically homeless men and women with their families and offers support needed to help them

avoid going back to prison while becoming both social and economic assets to their family and

community. The federal partnership will include evidence-based practices from the Department

of Justice’s (DOJ) Second Chance Programs and the Department of Housing and Urban

14

Development (HUD) (Johnson, 2011). With the assistance of the DOJ, the program will work

with participants in correctional facilities to help them prepare for reentry. They will receive

case-management and skills development, while also working with willing family members to

have a smooth transition for reunification (Johnson, 2011). Then HUD will work the program to

ensure that the housing needs of participants and their spouses or partners are met (Johnson,

2011).

Colorado Second Chance Housing and Re-entry Program

The Colorado Second Chance Housing and Re-entry Program (C-SCHARP) was created

from a federal grant awarded to the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), Division of

Housing (DOH) as the lead agency and the Colorado Department of Corrections (DOC) as a

partner. The grant derives from the Second Chance Act Adult Demonstration Program through

the United States Department of Justice, which is intended to help state and local agencies

successfully reintegrate those returning from incarceration back into their communities. C-

SCHARP provides assistance for 40 eligible adult offenders with serious mental illness,

substance abuse disorders, who have no subsequent housing identified, and are at high risk for

recidivism while they are released on parole. C-SCHARP is focused on the Denver metropolitan

area but the Governor's office is assessing the possibility of scaling the program for the entire

State of Colorado.

The DOH's approach is to use both “housing first” and Assertive Community Treatment

models to ensure that participants receive rental assistance, psychotherapy, substance abuse

counseling and wrap-around case management to interrupt the cycle of homelessness and

recidivism (DOLA, 2014). The DOH and the DOC recognize they are unable to run this program

alone so they have capitalized on additional collaborations with agencies like the Colorado’s

15

Medicaid and Human Service agencies. In addition to the DOC, DOH’s sub-grantees include

Arapahoe/Douglas Mental Health Network (ADMHN), Aurora Mental Health Center

(AUMHC), Jefferson Center for Mental Health, Mental Health Center of Denver (MHCD), and

Mental Health Partners of Boulder (MHP).

In order to be responsive to the population and to be able to fully understand the needs

and issues, the DOH created The Interdepartmental Reentry Team (IRT). The IRT includes

stakeholders from many different fields and identifies the needs of prisoners re-entering their

communities and works to identify resources and to develop goals and recommend strategies to

help prevent recidivism (DOLA, 2014). The IRT includes members of the Governor’s Office of

Policy and Initiatives, representatives of the Colorado Legislature, the Colorado DOC, Colorado

DOLA, DOH, City of Denver, Denver’s Road Home, Housing and Homeless Funders

Collaborative, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Colorado Department of Health Care

Policy and Financing, Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, Colorado Department of

Education, Metro Denver Homeless Initiative, the Colorado Department of Human Services, law

enforcement, mental health centers, faith-based organizations, and agencies specializing in the

treatment substance use disorders.

C-SCHARP is examining how the technical violation of parole can affect the dually-

diagnosed (mental illness and substance abuse). The C-SHARP programs works with

participants specifically to ensure they understand the full terms of their parole, are able to

follow all conditions of their parole, and that they do not commit any technical violations that

might send them back to prison.

Housing is a key component to success for the C-SHARP program. According the DOLA

proposal, "The DOH will provide 40 slots of rental assistance and then participating agencies

16

work will with their local housing authorities to add C-SCHARP program participants as a

housing preference for Section 8 vouchers, thereby promoting housing sustainability for the

enrolled participants. Additionally, DOH and the mental health centers will educate housing

authorities, landlords, and management companies about HUD regulations to increase the

number accepting former offenders."

The DOH will complete their goal by using federal funds and available state grant money

for tenant-based rental assistance. The individual mental health agencies are responsible for

finding acceptable landlords and working out an agreement for the participant with that landlord.

Some mental health agencies are focusing on building their own properties to house and serve

this population. One property being built by the MHCD will dedicate 200 units for their use.

Substance abusers released in 2002 (Langan & Levin) had a recidivism rate that exceeded

non-substance abusers by about 18 percent within three years of their release. DOC does not

measure the recidivism rate of offenders with serious mental illness separately. Overall, the 2007

release cohort had a 3-year recidivism rate of almost 52 percent and the dually-diagnosed

offenders would likely have a recidivism rate closer to 70 percent (DOLA, 2014). In its existing

grant, C-SCHARP has served a total of 56 former offenders to date and is currently housing and

providing services to 41 program participants. The program has seen increased success from

participants who have been in the program six months or longer. The University of Denver is

working to evaluate the effectiveness of this program but it can be difficult to measure and track

the correct data with this specific population.

In total, C-SCHARP costs roughly $18,333 per participant when both housing and

wraparound services are taken into account, even when omitting smaller in-kind donations

provided by the mental health centers (Ullman, 2013). Comparing the costs of having an

17

individual incarcerated for $30,000 or in the C-SCHARP program, taxpayers not only realize a

financial savings but also intangible societal benefits.

Denver Community Re-entry Program

When the City of Denver decided to build a whole new jail and justice center there was

push back from the community to also develop a program to help people out of the criminal

justice system and encourage a law abiding way of life. With that as the goal, the Community

Re-entry Program (CRP) was created. The program, one of the first of its kind in the nation, is

funded entirely by the City and County of Denver. It is a voluntary comprehensive program that

uses an individualized approach to help those leaving the Denver County Jail.

Participants can start the program while still in jail or up to a year after release. The CRP

works specifically with those who have most recently served time for a misdemeanor offense

although those with felonies on their record are not prohibited from joining. Every individual

who enters the program receives an assessment that will drive their case plan with evidence-

based targeting. For example, are they an individual who suffers from an addiction? Did they get

into trouble because of who they associate with? Did they suffer from a traumatic event that they

have not been able to overcome?

The CRP helps participants address basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter but

also helps develop skills that will make their re-entry successful. They offer GED classes, mental

health support and referrals, career coaching, job search assistance, bus tickets and passes,

benefits acquisition services, computer skills acquisition and computer access, and case

management support (CRP, 2015).

CRP provides access to emergency shelter assistance but also works with Denver

Housing Authority to place program participants into stable Section 8 housing. Eighty percent of

18

those who enter the program are considered homeless. If a person is not on a lease then they are

considered homeless according to the program.

Since its creation CRP has seen great success with those who participate with

consistency. Those who completed over 21 services (about two to three months) with CRP had

only a 16 percent recidivism rate. 5,233 units of service were provided to 474 clients at DCJ by

CRP staff with inmates earning a total of 821 days off of their sentences, which saved DCJ

$42,692 in jail bed days (CRP, 2015).

Methods

Interviews

There are many different organizations that specialize in getting people into permanent

affordable housing and some that specifically help with prisoner re-entry. Ten people who work

in such organizations were interviewed in a standardized open-ended question format for this

paper. Interviews were conducted in-person or via telephone call.

The client gave recommendations regarding who would be a good resource to start the

interviews and a snowball sample was used to grow the interview pool based on programs

identified through research or from professionals in the field. The sample was varied by choosing

programs serving diverse clients from different sectors including government, nonprofit, and

private.

Each interview lasted between 15 minutes to an hour and a half. Each subject was asked

for their perspective on the problems ex-felons face and successful solutions to address these

problems. Interviews were expanded on follow-up questions that arose during the conversations.

The length of time in each interview varied by the amount of time each interviewee had to give.

19

The most in-depth interviews were with those who work with existing re-entry programs, to gain

the most detail for that section of the paper and those interviewees were able to provide

additional resources and commentary that was not readily available without the interviews. The

interviews were relative to the complexity of each program serving ex-felons and the information

they were able to provide for the paper.

The interviews were centered on three main questions:

• What do you see as the main problems for prisoner reintegration?

• What do you think the solutions are to those problems and to reduce the recidivism rate?

• What does your program do to address this problem?

Interviews were conducted with:

• Mike Anderson, Owner - J.A.G. Properties

• Christie Donner, Executive Director - Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition

• Alison George, Deputy Director - Division of Housing, Colorado Department of Local

Affairs

• Carol Lease, Executive Director - The Empowerment Program

• Jenn Lopez, Director of Homeless Initiatives - Colorado Governor's Office

• Taylor Moore, Program Evaluation Manager - Mental Health Center

• Ageno Otii, Case Manager - Community Re-entry Project

• Matthew Saks, Vice-Chair, Board of Directors - Step 13

• Lisa Thompson, Director of Housing First and ACT Services - Colorado Coalition for the

Homeless

• Kristin Toombs, Homeless Programs Team Manager - Colorado Department of Local

Affairs

20

Literature Review

An extensive literature review was conducted to further explore the issues presented

during the interviews and to learn about additional problems with re-entry. It was discovered

during the literature review and in one interview that racial disparities exist not only in the

criminal justice system but also over several fields can be indicators as to whether someone is

more than likely to go to prison in their lifetime. Facts from the literature referred to throughout

this paper support the logic of the interviewees.

Results

Common themes were identified after analyzing interview notes. Refer to Appendix 1

for a chart detailing main themes from each interview. Appendix 2 shows what each interviewee

identified as a problem for re-entry during their interview. After completing my interviews the

Colorado housing market, employment, parole complications, mental health issues, and addiction

problems all emerged as common themes.

It was very obvious that the Colorado housing market was one of the main problems

creating a strain in trying to place those going through reintegration into stable housing. All of

the interviewees mentioned the burden the housing market is putting on those who are going

through re-entry in their interviews. It has been difficult to find landlords who want to accept

Section 8 housing vouchers over taking a full market value. With so many people moving to

Colorado every year the availability of units continues to decrease.

Obtaining employment is a challenge for those leaving prison and if stable employment

cannot be secured then it is nearly impossible to stay in housing. Six interviewees mentioned

21

employment as a major barrier and talked about programs that help people gain jobs. CRP not

only helps ex-offenders get employment but helps them to raise their salary to a livable wage.

Seventy percent of the interviewees mentioned mental health issues and addiction

problems as a major issue they face while working with the population. Many people enter the

prison system with undiagnosed mental health issues but evaluations through the Department of

Corrections are helping to diagnose the illness. During incarceration, inmates have access to

mental health professionals and medications, which are still needed after they are released.

Four interviewees mentioned the pressure parolees were under to follow the conditions of

their parole and how it could be too complex for some people to adhere to. Christie Donner

wrote a resource guide with her organization to help those going through the re-entry process by

detailing what the process is and describing resources available to ensure success. Carol Lease

said she believes if extra effort is taken at the beginning it can bring more success.

Recommendations

After, reviewing the challenges people with criminal histories have to stay out of prison

and succeed in obtaining stable permanent housing there are several ways Housing Colorado can

assist through advocacy and membership strengths. Colorado needs more affordable housing

units on the market and Housing Colorado is in a position to support state legislation that

promotes the development of more units. The membership of Housing Colorado is varied and

there is an opportunity for interested members to partner with organizations who are working

with this population or model new programs by benchmarking existing success stories. Below

are a few specific examples where Housing Colorado can engage.

22

Low Income Housing Tax Credit

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan created the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit

(LIHTC). The Colorado State Legislature followed suit and in bipartisan fashion passed the

Colorado state LIHTC for two years. From 2001-2002 the tax credit was utilized to support 800

units becoming available at affordable rates for 30-40 years. Despite the success of the program,

cuts were made to the state budget because of the downturn of the economy and state LIHTC

was no longer supported. The state budget was able to recover partially and in 2014 the state

LIHTC was renewed. For the 2015-2016 budgets the state was able to devote $5 million to the

state LIHTC which resulted in 1,902 supported units from this tax credit alone (CHFA, 2015).

The Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA) is the entity responsible for

allocating the tax credit funds. The state LIHTC is directed to serve certain populations including

permanent supportive homeless housing. One of the CHFA approved developments directly

supported with state LIHTC funds will focus on supportive homeless housing. This

developments will provide housing and wrap-around services for residents including case

management, employee training, and mental health treatment (CHFA, 2015). Even though this

program is not targeted for those who are facing reentry when more units are available then it

eases pressure for all.

CHFA was also able to support an additional five projects (of the total thirty

developments) for supportive homeless housing because of additional funds from the state

LIHTC. This is the largest number of supportive homeless housing developments supported by

CHFA in a single year (CHFA, 2015). When CHFA is able to build more units and keep them

affordable for decades at a time, it is possible to help hundreds of more people.

23

Re-entry Programs in Correctional Facilities

More than 95 percent of individuals who enter prison will be released back to their home

communities (CSGJC, 2015). The high recidivism rate suggests that most of the people facing

re-entry are not prepared for the challenges that face them when they leave prison. A study

conducted by the Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition, found that 61 percent of those

leaving prison in Colorado did not take a re-entry class before they left and the primary reason

was that such a class was not offered. Of those who did take a class, 77 percent rated the classes

as "helpful" or "very helpful." Re-entry classes can range from correctional education programs

to drug treatment classes.

Prisoners participate in any type of correctional education program, whether it is adult

basic education, GED preparation, college education or vocational training, have a 13 percent

reduction in their risk of being re-incarcerated (Westervelt, 2015). And for those who

participated in college programs their reduction in risk of re-incarceration was 16 percent

(Westervelt, 2015).

Many states and jurisdictions are not only offering re-entry preparation classes but are

offering an incentive of early release to those willing to participate. Seventy-two percent of

people who dropped out of programs to receive treatment for drug problems stated that their

primary motivation for entering the program was to receive treatment but 83 percent of those

who completed their programs stated that their primary motivation was a reduction in sentence

length (Robbins, 2009). Prison-based substance abuse treatment for women may be more

successful in retaining clients who see it as a means to early release and reunification with their

families (Robbins, 2009).

24

Washington State Institute for Public Policy conducted a cost-benefit analysis of crime-

reduction programs from around the United States over the past 25 years. The research found

that the programs not only saw both reduced recidivism and cost savings from reduced crime but

that it was a good investment for taxpayer dollars. In-prison vocational programs produced net

benefits of $13,738 per offender, which was a $12.62 return for every dollar invested (PCT,

2010). Adult general education produced net benefits of $10,669 per offender, which equated to

$12.09 per dollar invested (PCT, 2010). Employment and job training services for offenders in

the community yielded $4,359 per offender, the equivalent of $11.90 per dollar invested (PCT,

2010). With more than half of all inmates in the United States serving maximum sentences of

less than eight years, and many being released before their sentences are complete, it makes

financial sense to educate those individuals so they can return to the workforce when they are

released (Skorton, 2013).

Non-profits Providing Low Income Housing

Colorado Coalition for the Homeless (CCH) created the Denver Housing First

Collaborative (DHFC) in 2006, which uses a Housing First model to help their clients (CCH,

2012). The DHFC does not specifically focus on ex-felons but those who are chronically

homeless. The program quickly allows families and individuals to access housing and supportive

services such as crisis intervention, follow-up case management, etc. (CCH, 2012). CCH has

served over 400 individuals in a housing first model and has seen a housing retention rate of 96

percent (CCH, 2012). Over a 24-month period, DHFC saw reduced incarceration days and an

average of 76 percent less for incarceration costs, along with $31,545 emergency service savings

per participant (CCH, 2012).

25

Step 13 is a non-profit in Denver that is considering purchasing and operating several

“transitional housing” projects, according to Matthew Saks. Step 13 is a Denver non-profit that

specializes in addiction recovery but allows ex-felons to participate in their programs. The

biggest risk facing the Step 13 participants is when they leave the program and they lose their

support network because they are more likely to return to old habits or have a relapse in sobriety.

The houses in the new developments will be affordable and have four to six men per house and

allow a “peer-recovery” model to continue. The residents will work in groups and rely on each

for support in their journeys to sobriety and rebuilding their lives.

Private Landlords Renting to People with Criminal Records

Mike Anderson owns and operates J.A.G. (Just Another Guy) Properties in Denver,

Colorado. J.A.G. rents exclusively to those with criminal histories. Mr. Anderson started his

company because he believes everyone deserves a second chance and families deserve a safe

place to live. On the business side of the equation, there is a huge need to house people with

criminal records. There is no additional liability on J.A.G. for housing this unique population.

J.A.G. rents its properties like any other private landlord and does not provide any

additional supportive services to their clients. Clients must have a job or income to stay in their

unit. The properties range from small houses to triplexes and fourplexes. The clients are provided

with private furnished bedrooms and only need to provide their own towels and sheets. The

clients pay rent weekly and there is a set of house rules they are expected to abide by.

J.A.G. clients are mostly single men and in the construction industry but Mr. Anderson

has clients with highly trained jobs who "just got into trouble." Mr. Anderson has other friends in

the landlord business who do not rent to ex-felons and they have equivalent eviction rates and

26

similar concerns regarding their clients. Some clients use the properties as transitional housing

and others have been in their units for over two years.

J.A.G. has never had to put a "for rent" sign on any of their properties. Clients are

referred to the business from a variety of different places, including the Colorado Department of

Corrections, reentry programs, charitable organizations, churches, etc. Mr. Anderson has seen a

15 percent recidivism rate for those that use his service. Other counties have requested his

business in their jurisdiction because of his success but it does not fit his personal business

aspirations. Mr. Anderson does not see any reason why this business model cannot work in other

settings and for other investors.

27

References

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2015). What is the Difference between Probation and Parole.

Retrieved from: www.bjs.gov.

City and County of Denver. (2014). Reported Offenses in the City and County of Denver by

Month. Retrieved from: denvergov.org

Colorado Coalition for the Homeless. (2015). Housing First Works to End homelessness.

Retrieved from: www.coloradocoalition.org.

Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition. (2015). Did You Know. Retrieved from:

www.ccjrc.org.

Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition (2010). 2010 Colorado Quick Facts. Retrieved

from: www.ccjrc.org.

Colorado Department of Corrections. (2011). Monetary Consideration for Departure,

Administrative Regulation.

Colorado Department of Corrections. (2015). Monthly Population and Capacity Report.

Retrieved: doc.state.co.us.

Colorado Department of Local Affairs/Division of Housing. (2014). Colorado Second Chance

Housing and Reentry Program.

Colorado Housing and Finance Authority. (2015). About State Low Income Housing Tax Credit.

Community Reentry Program. (2015). Retrieved from: www.communityreentryprogram.org.

Council of State Governments Justice Center. (2014). Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver

Results. Retrieved from: www.bja.gov.

Council of State Governments Justice Center. (2015). Federal Interagency Reentry Council.

Retrieved from: www.csgjusticecenter.org.

28

Davis, L., Bozick, R., Steele, J., Saunders, J., & Miles, J. (2013). Evaluating the Effectiveness of

Correctional Education. The Bureau of Justice Assistance. Retrieved from:

www.rand.org.

Department of Justice Bureau of Prisons. (2013). Annual Determination of Average Cost of

Incarceration. Retrieved from: www.federalregister.gov.

Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. (2015). Prisoners and Prisoner Re-entry.

Retrieved from: www.justice.gov.

Donner, C. (2012). The Go Guide: Getting On After Getting out, A Re-entry Guide for Colorado.

Denver: Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition.

Ewert, S. & Wildhagen, T. (2011). Educational Characteristics of Prisoners: Data from the ACS.

Retrieved from: www.census.gov.

Foster, H., & Hagan, J. (2009). The Mass Incarceration of Parents in America: Issues of

Race/Ethnicity, Collateral Damage to Children, and Prisoner Reentry. Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Science, 623, 179–194.

Garland, B., Spohn C., & Wodahl, E. (2008). Racial Disproportionality in the American Prison

Population: Using Blumstein Method to Address the Critical Race and Justice Issue of

the 21st Century. Justice Policy Journal, 5(2).

Glaze, L. & Bonczar, T. (2011). Probation and Parole in the United States, 2010. US Department

of Justice Bulletin.

Gonzalez, A. (2014). Snapshot of Colorado Latinos. Colorado Latino Leadership, Advocacy, &

Research Organization. Retrieved from: www.cllarocolorado.org.

29

Gonzalez, J. & Connell N. (2014). Mental Health of Prisoners: Identifying Barriers to Mental

Health Treatment and Medication Continuity. American Journal of Public Health,

104(12).

Hannon, L. & Defina, R. (2010). The state of the Economy and the Relationship Between

Prisoner Reentry and Crime. Social Problems, 57(4), 611-629.

Holzer, H., Raphael, S., & Stoll, M. (2003). Employment Dimensions of Reentry:

Understanding the Nexus between Prisoner Reentry and Work. New York University

Law School.

Housing Colorado. (2015). Strategic plan. Retrieved from: www.housingcolorado.org.

Hubbard, V. & Espinola A. (2015). Losing Ground. Rocky Mountain PBS I-News.

Johnson, E. (2011). A Partnership for Positive Re-entry. The White House. Retrieved from:

www.whitehouse.gov.

Johnson, N. (2015). Obama Administration to Give Pell Grants to Prisoners. The Daily Signal.

Katz, E. (2015). Lawmakers Look to Bring More Former Felons to Federal Ranks. Government

Executive. Retrieved: from www.govexec.com.

Live Affordably Colorado. (2015). Home Economics. Retrieved from:

www.LiveAffordablyColorado.org.

Lochner, L. & Moretti E. (2003). The Effect of Education on Crime: Evidence from Prison

Inmates, Arrests, and Self-Reports. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Peeples, C. (2009) Homelessness and Parole, A Survey of Denver's Shelters. Colorado Criminal

Justice Reform Coalition.

The Pew Charitable Trusts. (2010). Collateral Costs: Incarceration’s Effect on Economic

Mobility. Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts.

30

The Piton Foundation. (2007). Study Portrays Struggles People Face After Prison. Retrieved

from: ccjrc.org.

Przybylski, R. (2008). What Works, Effective Recidivism Reduction and Risk-Focused

Prevention Programs.

Robbins, C., Martin, S. & Surratt, H. (2009). Substance Abuse Treatment, Anticipated Maternal

Roles, and Reentry Success of Drug-Involved Women Prisoners. Crime & Delinquency,

55(3), 388-411.

Skorton, D. & Altschuler, G. (2013). College Behind Bars: How Educating Prisoners Pays Off.

Forbes Magazine.

Svaldi, A. & Rusch E. (2015). Colorado's Full Employment Not so Full. The Denver Post.

Ullman, D. (2013). Colorado Second Chance Housing and Reentry Program, An Evaluation of a

Pay-For-Success Pilot Contract in Colorado.

Vera Institute of Justice (2015). Public Housing for People With Criminal Backgrounds.

Retrieved from: www.vera.org.

Vera Institute of Justice. (2012). The Price of Prisons, Colorado. Retrieved from: www.vera.org

Westervelt, E. (2015). Measuring the Power of a Prison Education. National Public Radio.

Retrieved from: www.npr.org.

31

Appendices

Appendix 1

Interview Summaries

In the order they were conducted

Problems with re-entry

Solutions Program

Taylor Moore Program Evaluation Manger Mental Health Center of Denver Mission: Enriching lives and minds by focusing on strengths and recovery.

Reintegration services are not available to all who need them. Finding landlords who are open to taking in those with criminal records. Gaining employment and keeping it. Treatment for those with mental health issues.

Colorado Second Chance Housing and Reintegration Program. Working with Department of Corrections to get people evaluated before they leave prison system. Comprehensive supportive services available to those who need them when they reintegrated.

Mental Health Center of Denver partners with the State of Colorado (through C-SHARP) to provide services such as finding and placing former prisoners in supportive housing, evaluating the prisoner (in and out of jail) for proper treatment, help the client to understand and manage their symptoms, keep them out of prison with support, facilitate them living on their own, collaborate case management work with their parole officer, helping families with the transition, etc.

Ageno Otii Case Manager Community Reentry Project Mission: Providing transitional services including

Finding consistent employment and housing- can be difficult beyond their criminal history because they are likely to be poor, people of color, and

Have a full assessment of those leaving prison and have a unique evidence-based case plan driven by their individual needs. The program should

Community Reentry Program Discussed in length on page * _*

32

Problems with re-entry

Solutions Program

goal planning, career development services, and cognitive behavioral education to adult Denver residents recently released from the Denver County Jail for their successful reintegration back into the community.

have "different personalities". Technical violations, not enough resources to help navigate the parole process. Access to public housing is decreasing while the demand is growing. Identify landlords who will accept Section 8 housing vouchers

also be culturally sensitive including taking their family into account. Work with the population to increase their income. Request a percentage of reduced rate housing in new buildings Find new ways for the government to partner with non-profits and other interested parties.

Alison George Director, Division of Housing Colorado Department of Local Affairs Kristin Toombs Homeless Programs Team Manager Colorado Department of Local Affairs Mission: Strengthening Colorado communities.

Identifying who is being released homeless because they are all given a 2 month housing voucher, if they do not have a designated place to go. Understanding the impact of technical parole violations on those dually diagnosed with mental illness and addiction problems. Recruiting landlords that will take all ex-felons (including sex offenders)

Figuring out how government officials and programs can work more efficiently and collaboratively. Example: putting parole officers in day centers Expanding C-SHARP statewide. Social impact bonds, there are currently two Denver projects in construction with this tool. Having services available to families and those newly released for 6-9 months (critical time intervention).

Colorado Second Chance Housing and Reintegration Program Discussed in length on page * _ *

33

Problems with re-entry

Solutions Program

Christie Donner Executive Director Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition Mission: Reverse the trend of mass incarceration in Colorado.

Collateral Consequences – punishments beyond what the judge gave (hard time getting housing, employment, children, student loans, etc. due to having a criminal record). Landlords not accepting section 8 housing vouchers. Public Housing Authorities creating rules that makes it difficult for ex-felons to secure housing. Systemic problems that do not allow people to recovery from the criminal justice system.

Reimagining a reduced role for prisons. Record sealing criminal histories for those who have not gotten into more trouble past a certain timeframe. Ex-convicts have a great record assisting others through the re-entry process. Non-profits building and managing more affordable housing units.

Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition is a privately funded non-profit that does not provide direct services but rather is a bridge for those who are in prison or reintegrating and trying to find their way. They advocate for public policy that reduces the use of incarceration, promotes reintegration services, funding for treatment, etc.

Jenn Lopez Director of Homeless Initiatives Governor's Office

Not having enough affordable units in Colorado. Criminal background checks that prevent people from being able to rent.

Learning from evidence-based programs around the country e.g. Returning Home Ohio and The Fortune Society NYC (they create more units and work on changing policy on criminal records.) Building new units with community partners to operate successful programs.

The Governor’s office has made permanent supportive housing a priority for the past year and a half. They have been working with a third party vendor to evaluate the effectiveness of the C-SHARP and how to scale it across the state.

34

Problems with re-entry

Solutions Program

Mike Anderson Owner Just Another Guy

Misperceptions of what it takes to be a landlord for those with a criminal history. Cannot use vouchers for most public housing and most landlords are not accepting them in this current rental market. This Denver housing market prevents him from adding more units because the price of each place has gone up so quickly. People have to be ready to make the change from a lifestyle that landed them in prison.

Landlords should talk to individuals about their criminal history because a lot of people do not have violent crimes on their record.

Rents exclusively to those who are leaving the prison system.

Lisa Thompson Director of Housing First and ACT Services Colorado Coalition for the Homeless Mission: To work collaboratively toward the prevention of homelessness and the creation of lasting solutions for homeless and at-risk families, children, and individuals throughout Colorado.

Denver housing market leaving a lack of affordable housing options. Mental Health and substance abuse issues. (Their research shows over 80 percent of the chronically homeless have substance abuse problems.)

Work with landlords to develop relationships with property investors. Responding to the needs of clients when they are in supportive housing. Work with clients to move to units where they can reunite with their families.

Housing First program works with 365 clients that they get into permanent supportive housing. 3 modified assertive community treatment teams made up of therapists, case managers, nurses, substance abuse providers, and the team works with about 120 clients to move into housing and maintain that housing.

35

Problems with re-entry

Solutions Program

Carol Lease Executive Director The Empowerment Program Mission: Provide education, employment assistance, health, housing referrals, and support services for women who are in disadvantaged positions due to incarceration, poverty, homelessness, HIV/AIDS infection, and/or involvement in the criminal justice system.

Mental Illness or drug addiction that goes untreated. More money needs to go into the reentry programs from the Department of Corrections.

Working with someone who is still in prison about how to have a successful reintegration and then providing the proper resources to help them be successful. Extra effort at the beginning. People need to hold their elected officials accountable.

The Empowerment Program serves women through education, employment assistance, case management, supportive services, and housing to decrease rates of recidivism.

Matthew Saks Vice-Chair, Board of Directors Step 13 Mission: Offer residents the opportunity to recover from the disease of addiction and become productive members of their communities through a program that focuses on the facets of sobriety, work, and personal accountability.

Denver housing market- Median rents rose 13% in Denver this year. Finding comprehensive supportive services once out of prison. Losing the support network they build before facing reintegration.

“Housing first” models like Seattle and San Francisco, giving housing to also be able to provide better services. Subsidized housing in areas that are connected to multimodal transportation. Revise the Denver inclusionary housing ordinance to be more effective and build more subsidized housing for at risk-populations.

Step 13 is a Denver non-profit that specializes in addiction recovery through a program that specializes on employment and personal accountability.

36

Appendix 2

Interview Main Topics

Colorado housing market

Mental illness

Employment Technical violations

Racial disparity

Family reunification

J.A.G. CCJRC DOLA TEP DHI-GOV MHC CRP STEP 13 CCH

37

Appendix 3

Fact Sheet

Supportive Services that Reduce the Recidivism Rate

By the end of 2015 it is estimated that Colorado will have close to 21,000 people in prison. The annual cost to incarcerate an inmate is $30,374 in Colorado. The Colorado Department of Corrections budget is $755 million, up from $70 million in 1985. Colorado will release close to 10,000 parolees annually. After being released from prison, parolees must secure steady work, pay for mandatory drug tests and classes, find housing, and secure transportation for their daily needs. Colorado had a three-year recidivism rate of 49 percent in 2010. 72 percent of those that do go back to prison do not go back because they commit a new crime but because they violate simple technical rules. Those newly released have consistently named finding stable housing and employment as the two hardest challenges for re-entry.

• Parolees cite lack of identification papers and driver’s licenses, employers’ reluctance to hire people with criminal records, and expenses associated with their parole as major work-related barriers.

• Only one-third of employers in a multi-city survey would consider hiring someone with a criminal record.

• About 70 percent of offenders and ex-offenders are high school dropouts • A strong tie to meaningful employment is one of the most important elements that lead to

less offending.

The Colorado housing crisis is not only affecting very low-income citizens, it has moved to impact seniors, children, and families.

• More than one-third of parolees in Denver end up at homeless shelters. • Many landlords are choosing not to accept Section 8 housing vouchers. • The Governor’s Office estimates that 5,800 additional supportive housing units, above those

currently available and being developed are required to meet the needs of Colorado’s homeless families and individuals.

Mental Health disorders among prisoners have exceeded rates of the general population. • Rates of recidivism are between 50 and 230 percent higher for persons with mental health

conditions Programs that not only provide housing but also have supportive services see the best success in keeping people out of prison.

• Project Reunite (PR) is a federal program that supports the successful reunification of formerly

incarcerated or chronically homeless men and women with their families and offers support needed to help them avoid going back to prison while becoming both social and economic assets to their family and community.

38

• PR is a partnership that uses evidence-based practices from the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Second Chance Programs and the Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD).

• The DOJ works with participants in correctional facilities and then HUD works with families and the participant to secure housing when they exit prison.

• Colorado Second Chance Housing and Re-entry Program (C-SCHARP) was created from a federal grant awarded to the Colorado Department of Local Affairs, Division of Housing as the lead agency and the Colorado Department of Corrections as a partner. • C-SCHARP provides assistance for 40 eligible adult offenders with serious mental illness,

substance abuse disorders, who have no subsequent housing identified, and are at high risk for recidivism while they are released on parole.

• The approach is to use both “housing first” and Assertive Community Treatment models to ensure that participants receive rental assistance, psychotherapy, substance abuse counseling and wrap-around case management

• The 2007 release cohort had a 3-year recidivism rate of almost 52 percent and the same offenders would likely have had a recidivism rate closer to 70 percent.

• C-SCHARP costs roughly $18,333 per participant when both housing and wraparound services are taken into account, even when omitting smaller in-kind donations provided by the mental health centers.

• Denver Community Re-entry Program (CRP) was created due to push back from the community to develop a program to help people out of the criminal justice system and encourage a law-abiding way of life. • Participants are those who have most recently served time for a misdemeanor offense and

they can start the program while still in jail or up to a year after release. • Every individual who enters the program receives an assessment that will drive their case

plan with evidence-based targeting. • CRP helps participants address basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter but also helps

develop skills that will make their re-entry successful. • Those who completed over 21 services (about two to three months) with CRP had only a 16

percent recidivism rate. • 5,233 units of service were provided to 474 clients by CRP staff with inmates earning a total

of 821 days off of their sentences, which saved Denver $42,692 in jail bed days. • The Denver Housing First Collaborative (DHFC) is a program from the Colorado Coalition for

the Homeless and uses a Housing First model. • DHFC saw reduced incarceration days and an average 76 percent less for incarceration

costs, along with $31,545 emergency savings per participant. Prisoners who participate in any type of correctional education program, whether it is adult basic education, GED preparation, college education or vocational training, have a 13 percent reduction in their risk of being re-incarcerated. In-prison vocational programs produced net benefits of $13,738 per offender, which was a $12.62 return for every dollar invested. Adult general education produced net benefits of $10,669 per offender, which equated to $12.09 per dollar invested. Employment and job training services for offenders in the community yielded $4,359 per offender, the equivalent of $11.90 per dollar invested.