FY 2012 Annual Report President

Arthur B. Hill

Salvation Army-

Harbor Light

Executive Director

Lusanne Green

OCCA Agency Members

Alvis House - Columbus,

Dayton, Chillicothe, Lima

Behavioral Healthcare Partners of

Central Ohio, Inc. - Newark

Community Assessment &

Treatment Services, Inc. -

Cleveland

Community Corrections

Association, Inc -Youngstown

Community Correctional Center,

Talbert House -Lebanon

Community Transition Center -

Lancaster

Community Treatment &

Correction Center, Inc. -

Canton

CROSSWAEH CBCF, Oriana

House, Inc. - Tiffin

Judge Nancy R. McDonnell

CBCF, Oriana House, Inc. -

Cleveland

Ohio Link Corrections &

Treatment, Inc. - Toledo

Oriana House, Inc. - Akron,

Cleveland, Sandusky

Salvation Army Harbor Light -

Cleveland

Summit County CBCF Oriana

House, Inc. - Akron

Talbert House - Cincinnati

Turtle Creek, Talbert House -

Lebanon

Volunteers of America of Greater

Ohio - Cincinnati, Dayton,

Mansfield

Volunteers of America of

Northwest Ohio - Toledo

2100 Stella Court, Columbus, Ohio 43215 ♦ PHONE: 614-252-8417X356, FAX: 614-252-7987

www.OCCAONLINE.org

Message from the President

Thank you for taking the time to read our Annual Report. This

report will provide some details of the many ways that Community

Corrections provides a better and more cost effective alternative to

both prison and expensive jail beds.

This year we celebrate our 40th anniversary, and we would like to

express appreciation for your support over these years. It is only with assistance and

collaboration that we have been able to steadily improve programming options to insure that

we are addressing the appropriate needs of the offenders in our communities

As we look towards the future it is imperative that we fully utilize the most effective program

that is offered within the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Transitional Control.

Of those inmates that complete Transitional Control in a Halfway House setting, 84% do not

return to prison in three (3) years. Transitional Control clients benefit from programming,

make communities safer by significantly reducing returns to prison, and submit 25% of their

gross pay to ODRC to help defray the cost of the program.

We commit to providing the highest quality of service to those in our charge and will continue

to be Ohio’s Best Bargain.

Sincerely,

Arthur B. Hill III - Beau

OCCA President

Mission The Ohio Community

Corrections Association

provides to member

community corrections

service providers the

opportunity for advo-

cacy and professional

development which en-

hances their ability to

reduce repeat criminal

offending.

Year End Statistics:

6,551 offenders were admitted to state-contract

halfway house programs; 2,954 of which were

Transitional Control participants.

45.7% of offenders were under Transitional

Control supervision

$780,093 was paid by offenders into the

Transitional Control rotary account.

17.8% of offenders were under Parole/

Post-Release Control supervision.

36.5% of offenders were under Community

Control supervision.

In state Fiscal Year 2012, OCCA fulfilled its mission of advocacy and professional development by:

CONDUCTING THE OCCA 12TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE on May 10-11, 2012. We had 339 attendees and

offered 23 professional workshops with 28 different faculty members. At this conference, members of the Ohio

House of Representatives, Ohio Senate, Correctional Institution Inspection Committee, and the Ohio Department of

Rehabilitation and Correction participated in a roundtable focused on public safety, the budget, and sentencing

reform.

OFFERING DAY TRAININGS on topics like Role Playing and Changing Offender

Behavior, Effective Practices in Correctional Settings (EPICS), and Motivational Interviewing. OCCA is authorized

by the state of Ohio to provide credentialing hours through the Ohio Counselor and Social Worker Board and the

Chemical Dependency Professionals Board - a designation we have held for over eight years.

FULLY PARTICIPATING IN THE OHIO EX-OFFENDER REENTRY COALITION, a statewide network of

government, public policy organizations, direct service providers, and faith-based communities collaborating to

educate the public and governmental leaders about model programs, statutes, and policies that will help people with

criminal records reintegrate into Ohio communities.

CO-SPONSORING THE FIRST ANNUAL RESTORED CITIZEN SUMMIT, a collaboration of state and local

agencies designed to assist ex-offenders in meeting employment, housing, and other needs that are associated with a

decreased likelihood of recidivating. Almost 400 ex-offenders participated in this one-day event attending

workshops on topics like child support, drivers license re-instatement, and learning a trade, and educational

opportunities. In addition, participants also received individualized assistance with resume writing and had access to

a clothing closet.

BUILDING ONGOING RELATIONSHIPS WITH POLICY MAKERS AND THEIR STAFF by hosting an

annual reception at the Statehouse complete with educational literature, participating in the Governor’s Workgroup

on Collateral Sanctions, and being an active advisor to the Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission, the Justice

Reinvestment Initiative, and the Ohio Justice Alliance for Community Corrections.

FISCAL YEAR 2012 ACCOMPLISHMENTS

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS RESIDENTIAL HIGHLIGHTS

There are 4 Community Based Correction Facilities (CBCFs) represented by OCCA; they serve 21 counties in Ohio.

In FY 2012 OCCA CBCFs served 1,510 people.

There are 13 Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction licensed halfway houses in Ohio operating at 37

facilities; all agencies are now accredited by the American Correctional Association, and most are dually certified by

the Ohio Department of Alcohol and Drug Addiction Services.

OCCA Community Based Correctional Facilities (CBCFs) 1,510 participants earned $276,586 paid $2,277 in

restitution, $7,374 in court costs, and $5,124 in child support; and completed 54,817 hours of community service.

Halfway Houses 6,551 program participants earned $5,875,739; paid $16,256 in restitution, $36,466 in court costs,

and $103,959 in child support; and completed 40,254 hours of community service.

Transitional Control 2,954 inmates earned $4,437,681; paid $14,370 in restitution, $8,018 in court costs, and

$53,952 in child support; and completed 20,580 hours of community service

Transitional Control Offenders submit 25% of gross pay to DRC to help defray the cost of the

program. Based upon gross earnings reported, this represents $1,109,420 paid to the TC rotary

account

Our association represents two types of residential community corrections programs. The first are non-profit run Community

Based Correctional Facilities – or CBCFs – which are funded 100% by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction and

divert felony offenders from entering prison. The Common Pleas Judges directly sentence offenders to these CBCFs for a period not

to exceed a six-month stay. The average length of stay is typically four months, during which time these offenders participate in

treatment programs including cognitive behavioral programming, chemical dependency counseling, vocational rehabilitation, and

educational classes including GED testing. In Fiscal Year 2012, there were 18 CBCFs operating in the State with a total of 2,341

beds. OCCA represents four non-profit operated Community Based Correctional Facilities. Facility governing boards oversee these

facilities.

Halfway Houses are residential programs that provide supervision and treatment services for offenders. There were 1,692 halfway

house beds under contract in the state for Fiscal Year 2012. The primary focus is to transition the offender back to the community

and assist with obtaining employment, stable housing, and connecting them to support services they can access independently.

Specialized services for substance abusers, sex offenders and the mentally ill may be offered. Most offenders enter halfway houses

in the following ways:

Direct Sentence. A direct sentence allows a judge to sentence an offender directly to a halfway house. This allows appropriate

offenders to be diverted from prison and placed in local community corrections programs while creating space in prison for violent

and dangerous offenders who need to be separated from society. If community corrections options are not available, local judges

will have no choice but to sentence these offenders to prison.

Probation or Parole Violation. With failure to meet the technical conditions of their probation or parole, (housing, employment,

abstinence from drugs and alcohol) offenders may need to be placed temporarily in a more structured environment, with some level

of supervision but not necessarily in prison. These violators need to be stabilized and understand the conditions of their probation or

parole. This alternative sanction keeps the offender from going to prison and enables them to transition back to the community

successfully.

Parole/ PRC/ Institutional Referrals. These prison inmates have completed their prison sentence and are released into the structured

environment of the halfway house to receive services and remain under the supervision of the Adult Parole Authority as they

transition into the community.

Transitional Control. These offenders are spending the final months of their sentence first in a halfway house and finally with

electronic monitoring in their home. Offenders completing their sentence in this way, have a lower recidivism rate than any of

the other categories listed above. In fact, in research conducted by the University of Cincinnati, Transitional Control

Offenders who served in a halfway house program demonstrated substantial recidivism reductions, up to 16%, when

compared with a control group.

OVERVIEW

Type of Facility Number State Funded

Cost per Day

Average

Length of

Stay

(days)

State Funded

Cost Per

Offender

Total

Offenders

Prison (all offenders) 29

$68.04 726 $49,397 50,129 (avg)

Prison (Felony Levels 3, 4,

and 5)

29 $68.04 394 $26,808 18,949

(1/1/12)

Halfway Houses 13 $63.93 92 $5,882 6,551

Community-Based

Correctional Facilities

18 $78.06 122 $9,523 6,583

Source: Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction Funded Community Corrections in Ohio 2012 Fact Sheet

Fiscal Year 2012 Annual Residential Program

Information and Costs

CBCF/HALFWAY HOUSE PROGRAM SERVICES PROVIDED

SERVICES

Education Services:

Literacy/Tutoring

Adult Basic Education

(ABE)

General Equivalency

Diploma (GED)

Preparation and Testing

Vocational Services

Computer Training

Employment Services:

Job Readiness

Jobs Assistance/

Placement/Retention

Special Services:

Mental Health

Sex Offender Treatment

Developmentally Disabled

Dual Diagnosis Treatment

Domestic Violence Services

Veteran Services

Geriatric Services NOTE: Not all services are provided by all

Halfway Houses or CBCFs

Alcohol / Drug Services:

Chemical Dependency Treatment

Aftercare / Relapse Prevention

Self Help Groups

Prevention

Drug & Alcohol Testing

Cognitive Skills:

Criminal Thinking

“Thinking for a Change”

Restorative Justice

Victim Impact

Anger Management

Family / Parenting

Fiscal Year 2012

All Residential

Community Corrections*

Program Benefits

*The data reflected in the above graphs represent all Ohio

community-based correctional facilities, including the four

that are member agencies of the OCCA.

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

41,739

250,376

Ho

urs

Community Service Hours

Halfway HousesCommunity-BasedCorrectional Facilities

$-

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

Income Earned

Taxes Paid

$5,875,739

$587,574 $1,151,496

$115,150

Halfway Houses

Community-Based Correctional Facilities

$-

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

$160,000

$180,000

Court Costs/Fines

Restitution Child Support

$36,466

$16,256

$103,959

$165,929

$30,332 $30,332

Halfway Houses

Community-Based Correctional Facilities

The Ohio Community Corrections Association (OCCA) includes 12 private, nonprofit organizations that provide

community corrections services to each of Ohio’s 88 counties. Community corrections programs such as Halfway

Houses and Community Based Correctional Facilities (CBCFs) are a solid, cost effective investment for Ohio.

OCCA programs are vital partners in the corrections continuum and we are keenly aware of the need for quality and

evidence-based programming. OCCA and the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) take

great pride in providing quality, research-driven services and are always looking for a means to provide

enhancements to the programming we already have in place. We have already achieved positive outcomes, as

determined by the University of Cincinnati (UC) in their most recent study on program effectiveness:

CBCFs contribute to public safety by reducing new crimes in our communities. Approximately 75% of successful

completers had no new felony convictions within two years of being released from a CBCF.

CBCFs are cheaper. The cost to treat Felony 3, Felony 4, and Felony 5 offenders in a CBCF is $9,523 per offender

compared to $26,808 in prison (Per ODRC FY’12 fact sheet).

Halfway Houses (HH) created safer communities by reducing new felony convictions by 5.9% for all successful

completing participants. This translates into 78% of successful completers having no new felony conviction

within 2 years of program completion.

These programs also save valuable tax dollars, Halfway Houses continued a 5.5% overall reduction in recidivism

and the most effective program reduced recidivism by 16.7%. This means that 76.6% of Halfway House

program participants who successfully completed did not return to prison. Across the state, the UC study

showed that the Transitional Control population had the lowest recidivism of all populations - 16.3%. Therefore,

83.7% of those successfully completing the Transitional Control Program did not return to prison within 2

years.

Halfway Houses are cheaper. The cost to treat Felony 3, Felony 4, and Felony 5 offenders in a Halfway House is

$5,882 per offender compared to $26,808 in prison (per ODRC FY’12 fact sheet).

Additional Cost Benefits (ODRC Fact Sheet, Aug 2012):

Paid $202,395 in Court Costs/Fines;

Paid $39,330 in Restitution;

Paid $134,291 in Child Support;

Earned $7,027,235 in income/wages;

Paid $702,724 in taxes; and

Contributed 292,730 hours of community service with estimated value to local communities of $5,523,815

The UC study noted the high quality of programs across the state but there are still many factors that influence

recidivism once a client leaves a community corrections program. Reentry is not solely a corrections issue - it is a

community issue. Hopefully, we can all work together to see that returning prisoners get the support from communities,

families, and public service systems that research has shown contributes to reduced recidivism.

All research data taken from the University of Cincinnati. Follow-up Evaluation of Ohio’s Community Based Correctional Facility and Halfway House Programs –

Outcome Study: 2010. University of Cincinnati, February, 2010. Available at: http://www.drc.ohio.gov/Public/UC%20Report.pdf

Community Corrections Programs: Are Cost

Effective and Do Contribute to Public Safety

The risk principle suggests that correctional practitioners should identify the risk level of

offenders within their care or supervision and allocate treatment and supervision

resources accordingly. In other words, services and supervision should be matched to the

risk level, with higher risk offenders receiving the highest levels of service and

supervision. To date, at least 7 meta-analyses involving more than 400 studies have

demonstrated scientific support for the risk principle. These studies have demonstrated

that: (1) correctional interventions are more likely to have a positive impact on moderate-

and high-risk offenders than low-risk offenders, (2) reductions in recidivism are greatest for the highest risk

offenders, and (3) intensive correctional interventions produce minimal, and sometimes worsening, effects on

recidivism when applied to low risk offenders. These studies have also demonstrated support for the risk principle

across populations, including juvenile offenders, adult offenders, female offenders, sex offenders, and violent

offenders.

Also of importance to Ohio is that there have been at least 3 statewide studies conducted by the University of

Cincinnati and funded by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction that demonstrate the impact on

adult offender recidivism. Two of these studies assessed the performance of halfway houses and CBCFs in the

state, while the other study assessed the performance of Community Corrections Act (CCA) programs. All 3 of

these studies found that community-based programs performed better with high risk offenders. For example, a 2002

study involving more than 13,000 offenders demonstrated that 64% of the halfway houses decreased rearrest rates

for high-risk offenders, and 68% decreased reincarceration rates. A similar pattern was found in the 2010 study

involving more than 20,000 offenders. This study found that 57% of the halfway houses demonstrated a treatment

effect for moderate- and high-risk offenders. Similarly, the CCA study also found that programs had a greater

impact on recidivism when 75% or more of the clients served were higher risk. A final key finding from the

halfway house/CBCF studies is that the majority of programs demonstrated higher recidivism for low risk offenders

compared to their no treatment comparison groups.

Combining these findings with the overarching goal of public safety, we see that targeting higher risk offenders is

imperative because (1) they represent the most risk to public safety, (2) the system nets the largest reductions in

crime when this group is targeted for interventions, and (3) the system runs the risk of increasing crime when it

focuses on targeting low-risk offenders for interventions. Two initiatives that have helped Ohio to strengthen its

ability to first identify and then target higher risk offenders for intervention is the statewide implementation of the

Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) and the implementation of House Bill 86. ORAS allows for a uniform

method across the state to both assess and track the risk level of offenders under correctional supervision, while HB

86 assists in targeting more high risk offenders for intervention.

To produce optimal results, practitioners must also effectively match the appropriate amount of programming and

supervision to the risk level of the offender. Correctional practitioners must determine the appropriate levels of

service to provide to offenders of varying risk. While much research indicates that programs that target higher risk

cases are more likely to be effective, there is far less research that has examined the impact of varying levels of

treatment dosage by risk. The research that has been done to date does indicate that programs that provide increased

treatment for higher risk offenders do produce greater reductions in recidivism. Some recent studies have even

suggested some practical guidelines for allocating treatment hours by risk. For example, one prison-based study

found that moderate risk offenders benefitted from 100 hours of treatment, while those who were deemed as

moderate risk/high need or high risk/few needs benefitted from 200 hours of treatment. Offenders who were both

high risk and high need appeared to require more than 300 hours of treatment. In a more recent study of dosage

conducted in an Ohio CBCF run by Talbert House, the authors found support for at least 100 hours of treatment for

moderate risk offenders and 200 hours of treatment for high risk offenders in order to produce optimal recidivism

reductions. Results from several additional Talbert House dosage studies may provide further refinement of these

findings and are planned for release within the next few months.

The Importance of Matching Offender Behavior Risk and Dosage

Kimberly Sperber, Ph.D., Chief Research Officer Talbert House

Transitional Control (TC) is a program created by statute in 1996 and administered by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC). Under TC, an inmate is transferred from prison to a halfway house where the inmate’s re-entry into the community is guided and supervised during the last 180 days of the sentence. No person with a sex offense or violent crime is eligible for TC.

Research shows that TC is ODRC’s most successful program.

Reduces Recidivism

The University of Cincinnati determined that TC participants had a 16% recidivism rate as compared to the statewide average of 31%

84% of those successfully

completing TC did not return to prison within 2 years

Makes all of our families and

communities safer!

Relieves Overcrowding

2,949 inmates were placed in TC in the last fiscal year.

Equates to a 2% overall

reduction in Ohio’s prison population.

Saves Ohioans approximately

$3 million ($8.59 marginal cost times 124 days average length of stay)

Speeds Reentry

Inmates in TC earn wages and pay restitution, child support and taxes.

Inmates in TC participate in: Supervision & Monitoring Education Vocational Training Substance Abuse Treatment Cognitive Treatment Job Search Assistance

In addition to allocating the appropriate number of hours of service, it is also important to ensure that the strategies

and interventions counted as dosage are evidence-based and target criminogenic needs. This is critical for both

treatment and supervision environments. For example, research has clearly demonstrated that cognitive-behavioral

treatment approaches are the most effective at reducing recidivism within both institutional and community-based

treatment settings. More recently, a Canadian study has demonstrated this to be true for probation and parole

environments as well. The authors found that offenders who received supervision from probation officers trained to

utilize cognitive-behavioral techniques within sessions demonstrated significantly lower recidivism rates than

offenders receiving supervision from officers not trained in cognitive-behavioral techniques.

In conclusion, corrections is becoming increasingly more defined by science as practitioners and policy makers

strive to ensure that correctional interventions are evidence-based and produce optimal impact on public safety.

Ohio has made - and continues to make - great strides in its efforts to effectively execute the risk principle in the

field across a variety of settings and offender populations. This is evidenced by changes in legislation, sentencing

practices, sanctioning practices, correctional agency policies and procedures, and an ongoing investment in

producing research that meets the needs of practitioners, the public, and the clients we serve here in Ohio.

The Importance of Matching Offender Behavior Risk and Dosage

cont’d

TRANSITIONAL CONTROL

Non-Profit

Organization

U.S. Postage

PAID

Columbus, Ohio

Permit No. 8258 2100 Stella Court

Columbus, Ohio 43215

www.occaonline.org

REGISTER NOW!

May 9-10, 2013 12th Annual Conference

“OCCA: Celebrating 40

Years of Commitment to

Service”

RCHs , CEUs, and COBs

AVAILABLE

OCCA 40th Anniversary

Roundtable:

“Collaboration - The

Roadmap to Success”

at Noon on MAY 9, 2013

(with preferred seating for

elected officials)

To be held at the Embassy Suites Columbus-Dublin, 5100 Upper Metro Place, Dublin, Ohio 43017

Reserve your room now by calling 1-800-EMBASSY. Please state that you are a guest of the Ohio Community

Corrections Association with group code COM for base room rate $117-$120.

For more information or to register, contact Gloria Hampton at (614)252-8417 ext 356, FAX (614)252-7987

Or visit our WEBSITE: www.occaonline.org

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS:

Dr. Mario Paparozzi, University of North Carolina at Pembroke

Director Gary Mohr, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

Director Tracy Plouck, Ohio Department of Mental Health

Dr. Kimberly Sperber, Talbert House