Motivational Interviewing helps rehabilitate offenders

Posted on May 2, 2013
| | | |

BI Incorporate, Motivational Interviewing, reentry centersThe National Institute of Corrections recently posted an article advocating the use of Motivational Interviewing in the corrections field. NIC describes MI as a technique for open communication between offenders and their supervisors that aims to help offenders overcome their reluctance to change problem behaviors.

Motivational Interviewing is a core principle of BI Incorporated Day Reporting programs as well as its in-custody or Jail Employment Education Program (JEEP). While MI is guided by an agent, such as a probation officer in the field or a case manager within a BI DRC, toward specific behavior change, it is also client-centered, which means it is considers the offender’s needs, wishes and beliefs about the change process. Agents first help offenders address issues that led to criminal behavior. Then, they try to help offenders figure out for themselves what the right thing to do is through a focused conversation. The ultimate goal is for offenders to find the personal motivation to achieve positive outcomes.

MI was born in the 1980s as an alternative to confrontational counseling styles that polarize clients and agents, which for a long time was common in the addictions treatment field. MI is not treatment itself; rather, it aims to prepare offenders for treatment or complement their treatment program. This evidence-based technique can be integrated into reentry programs to aid the rehabilitation process. By changing an offender’s thinking and problem behaviors, MI has the potential to help effectively rehabilitate offenders and reduce recidivism.

The NIC published a guide for implementing MI in Corrections. It covers the history of MI, how to learn it, supervising and coaching MI, and assessing MI skills. You can read the full guide here,

Posted in BI Insight, Reentry

NIC releases publication on evidence-based practices

Posted on April 25, 2013
| | | |

evidence-based practice BI IncThe National Institute of Corrections, an agency within the U.S. Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Prisons, recently released a publication on evidence-based practices called “Evidence-based practices in the criminal justice system: An annotated bibliography.” Coinciding with the NIC’s mission to advance effective correctional practice and public policy, this publication equips readers with knowledge of evidence-based policy and practice and links them to additional resources on the subject.

The publication provides an overview of eight principles, incorporated into all BI treatment and training programs such as Day Reporting Centers, cited as proven strategies to reduce recidivism and enhance public safety. The principles include:

  • Assessing offender risks and needs
  • Target interventions
  • Enhancing offender motivation to change
  • Providing skill training and directed practice
  • Increasing positive reinforcement
  • Engaging ongoing community support
  • Measuring relevant processes and practices
  • Providing measurement feedback

In addition to these core principles, the publication discusses and provides resources on other corrections subjects including effective rehabilitation programs; appropriate caseload sizes for probation officers; the effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders; pretrial services; specialty courts; and more. A PDF of the full publication is available here.

Posted in Industry News, Reentry

DOL announces $20 million in grant funds for reentry programs

Posted on April 23, 2013
| | | |

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration recently announced $20 million in grant funds will be available to help adult inmates successfully re-enter the workforce after they leave prison. Fifteen grants of up to $1.4 million each will be awarded through the Training to Work-Adult Reentry program. Organizations providing training and employment services for inmates will be eligible to apply.

After investing in five generations of the employment-centered Reintegration of Adult Ex-Offenders Program, the ETA found that ex-offenders fair better in the job market if they have credentials in their chosen industry. They have also learned ex-offenders reenter their communities more successfully when they receive supportive services prior to their release from prison. Based on this research, the ETA will require grantees to provide inmates with the necessary education and training to receive these industry-recognized credentials. Grantees must also provide employment preparation and mentoring, and connect participants with supportive services.

Approximately 700,000 inmates are released from prisons every year. Re-entry programs supported by these grants help them successfully transition back into their communities by providing them with the skills and support necessary to obtain good jobs. Successfully reentering the community reduces the likelihood they’ll reoffend, and subsequently, save taxpayers money that would otherwise be spent on the high cost of incarceration. BI Incorporated, as part of day reporting and in-custody programs it operates for community corrections agencies, delivers employment and educational modules that help inmates, parolees and probationers gain footing in the job market. With gainful employment, ex-offenders usually stabilize and are less likely to re-offend.

Read the DOL’s announcement here.

Posted in Reentry

Aging inmate population costs states more in health care

Posted on April 10, 2013
| | | |

imgresUSA Today recently published an article outlining the high cost of caring for an aging inmate population. According to a study by the American Civil Liberties Union, it costs nearly $70,000 to care for a single elderly inmate, while it costs just $34,135 to house a younger inmate. The reason it costs more to care for older inmates is that, like senior citizens everywhere, they face more health issues, including high blood pressure, vision problems, arthritis, difficulty walking, heart bypass surgery, cancer and dementia. The state is required to pay for their health care expenses, which means these inmates do not qualify for federal programs like Medicaid or Medicare.

The high cost of caring for inmates aged 50 and older is becoming increasingly problematic for states as the elderly inmate population soars. In New Jersey alone, the inmate population has increased nearly 90 percent since 2000, with nearly 3,000 older prisoners incarcerated. In fact, older inmates are the fastest growing segment of the prison population across the country. According to a 2012 ACLU report, approximately 246,000 inmates were over the age of 50.

BI Incorporated works with many correctional agencies to manage inmates, most of whom have demonstrated positive patterns behind bars, in the community. BI equipment and software allows inmates to be monitored with electronic monitoring systems at a much lower cost than incarceration while they serve out their sentences. With more aging prisoners, states in particular seek cost-effective options that reduce costs with relatively low risk to public safety.

With so many elderly inmates behind bars and the high cost of incarcerating them, many states are taking action to move older inmates out of prison. In Louisiana, for example, state legislators have passed laws making it easier for older, non-violent, low-risk offenders to be released early. The ACLU urges states to adopt a program similar to Louisiana’s, especially since decades of research show crime rates decrease steadily after age 24, and almost no crimes are committed by those older than 65.

Posted in Monitoring Technology

EM panel reinforces importance of managing alerts

Posted on April 2, 2013
| | | |

ET_mIn a recent Journal of Offender Monitoring article (vol. 24, issue 2), Marc Renzema, Professor of Criminal Justice at Kutztown University, interviewed four experienced electronic monitoring professionals, including BI’s Jock Waldo. The panel reflected on how far the electronic monitoring industry has come, advancements in technology, expectations and legislative influences.

Of particular note, the panel also talked about matching certain offenders with an appropriate level of supervision via electronic monitoring. “If it’s a sex offender, obviously you’d want GPS (tracking),” said Richard Irrer, former head of the Michigan DOC’s electronic monitoring programs, one of the largest and oldest in the nation.

In addition, the group highlighted the fact that electronic monitoring providers do not select which clients go on which type of system (GPS tracking, alcohol monitoring, RFID, etc.), and the importance of closely monitoring offenders. Across the board, the panel reminded community corrections professionals of the importance of managing alerts promptly.

Offenders will test the system, said one panelist, “trying a tamper here and there, miss a curfew by five, 10 or 15 minutes,” to test boundaries and see if supervising agents are paying attention. Supervising agents have to respond, letting the offender know right way that there will be consequences for noncompliant actions and tampers.

BI’s monitoring hardware uses multiple tamper technologies and our monitoring software incorporates numerous safeguards that enable BI to notify agencies of abnormal system or offender activity. At the same time, BI consistently reminds customers that physical inspection of installed devices is a critical part of maintaining the integrity of any location monitoring system. BI devices are designed so that client attempts to open, tamper with, or damage the device are visible upon physical inspection. In addition, agencies can adjust alert settings for problematic clients.

With crowded jails and prisons nationwide, consequences may not always include incarceration, but this is an option for certain tampers or noncompliant actions. Instead, other graduated consequences can be employed, such as more restrictive curfews or a change from one type of system to another, such as RFID to GPS tracking, which offers more details on offender movement in the community. “Agencies are becoming a little more creative along those lines,” Irrer said.

Posted in Monitoring Technology

Senate bill aims to ease jail crowding

Posted on March 28, 2013
| | | |

courtsEarlier this week, Senators Rand Paul and Patrick Leahy introduced legislation to reform harsh mandatory minimum sentences. The bill would expand the “safety valve” provision, which currently allows judges to sentence offenders below mandatory minimum prison terms in certain drug cases. Paul and Leahy’s bill would allow judges to sentence below mandatory minimums in federal crimes as well.

The bill is receiving bipartisan support, as well as praise from federal judges and Families Against Mandatory Minimums. According to a 2010 survey by the United States Sentencing Commission, as many as 70 percent of Federal district court judges supported expanding the safety valve.

The problem with mandatory minimum sentencing, according to Leahy, is that it contributes to prison overcrowding. The United States currently has the highest prison population in the world, incarcerating almost a quarter of the world’s prisoners. While long prison sentences can make sense for violent criminals, says Leahy, they are unnecessary in most cases and merely drive the prison population up even further.

In addition to easing jail crowding, Senators Paul and Leahy hope the new legislation will shift sentencing power from prosecutors to judges and make sentencing more just. Mandatory minimum sentences give prosecutors too much discretion in sentencing and often result in unduly harsh punishments for offenders. While expanding the bill is a good start to reforming the justice system, some judges believe more needs to be done. US District Judge John Gleeson, for example, says the US Sentencing Guidelines are too harsh and need to be reformed by the US Sentencing Commission.

Read more about the senate bill here.

Posted in Uncategorized

Corrections alternatives save money and reduce recidivism

Posted on March 26, 2013
| | | |

PrisonsRecently, The American Conservative published an article about the advantages of exploring alternatives to incarceration. Currently, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the developed world, with 716 out of every 100,000 people in prison. According to the article, these high incarceration rates are expensive for taxpayers, ranging from $25,000 to $90,000 per inmate each year, depending on state or jurisdiction. Alternatives to prison, on the other hand, can be more cost-effective and even lead to greater public safety by reducing recidivism, according to the authors.

Vikrant P. Reddy and Marc A. Levin, article authors and senior policy advisers to the Right on Crime campaign in Austin, Texas, say that while prisons are important for protecting the community from violent, career offenders, incarcerating nonviolent offenders can be counter-productive. Reddy and Levin maintain that prisons are “graduate schools for crime,” making nonviolent, low-level offenders more likely to reoffend.

Reddy and Levin say rehabilitating nonviolent, low-level offenders is a better option than incarceration. By rehabilitating these offenders, you can break the cycle of crime. They can reenter society as productive members and save taxpayers money in the long run. Correctional alternatives to prison include electronic monitoring, problem-solving courts, and actuarial risk and needs assessments that match offenders with the right level and type of community supervision. Many states are exploring these alternatives and the results have been promising. In Texas, legislators allocated funds to community-based options including probation, problem-solving courts and evidence-based drug treatment. Since Texas shifted to these alternatives in 2007, crime has dropped by 25 percent.

According to the authors, the HOPE Court in Hawaii uses swift and certain sanctions to promote compliance with drug tests and probation. For example, drug offenders must comply with random drug testing. If they fail the drug tests, the court requires them to immediately go to jail for a short time, usually a weekend. These sanctions have led to a two-thirds decline in substance abuse and probation failures in the state. Other states exploring alternatives to incarceration and enacting major corrections reform include California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Louisiana and Georgia.

Posted in Industry News, Monitoring Technology, Reentry

9 things to consider when selecting an electronic monitoring provider

Posted on March 8, 2013
| | | |

GC04_150dpi_RGB (3)For community corrections agencies, selecting an electronic monitoring provider is a critical decision involving a long-term commitment with a partner to support your public safety efforts. The following are nine important considerations when selecting your next electronic monitoring provider.

OEM: How and where does the electronic monitoring company manufacture its products? Geographic manufacturing locations and production processes vary widely. You want the company you work with to stand behind the product you purchase or lease. The more involved they are—from research and design to manufacturing and production—the more control they have over product and delivery.

Product and Service Continuum: Offender risks and needs vary and budgets are finite, so a one-size-fits-all approach for electronic monitoring supervision is not realistic today. Instead, you may want a system that is more intensive, such as a GPS tracking system; or one that is less intensive but does an excellent job of tracking schedules and curfews, such as a radio-frequency system; or a system designed for alcohol abusers, such as transdermal alcohol monitoring. The most valuable EM provider offers a range of products and services to meet different offender classifications and budgets.

Commitment to R & D:  Four decades ago, Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore said the power of computing doubles every two years. Today, that cycle may be even shorter. Technology is advancing rapidly, and you must evaluate whether an electronic monitoring provider partner is committed to advancing with this rapid pace, and whether they bring new ideas to the offender supervision market. Don’t get stuck with a one-trick pony that can’t keep up when technology advances.

Track Record: How many agencies do they work with? What types of agencies do they have contracts with? What is their product and service reliability record? How long have they been in the industry? How long has the call center been operating, and what is its customer service record? These and other experience-related questions will help clarify the electronic monitoring company’s abilities.

Technical Support:  Technical support often comes in the form of a national monitoring center. These experts can help set up or manage offender supervision strategies with you and provide specific technical product support. Specialists in BI’s Monitoring Operations Center, a leading call center in the industry, have an average length of service of nine years. Reliable, stable, and knowledgeable support contributes heavily to the success of an electronic monitoring program.

Financial Stability: Several electronic monitoring manufacturers exist in the market today, but only a handful is financially stable. Correctional agencies should choose a provider that is financially strong. Look closely at the company’s financial stability and whether it is part of a reliable parent organization.

Transparency: When you are selecting—or working with—an electronic monitoring provider, ask tough questions and demand the highest quality products and services. If the answers to your questions seem selective and not forthcoming, be wary. Your electronic monitoring provider should be direct, honest and transparent with all facets of the products and services you are leasing or buying.

References:  An electronic monitoring provider will obviously have a well-rehearsed list of reasons you should select them, but they must also be willing to provide a number of credible customer references. Ask to speak with an agency similar in program size and scope, and ask detailed questions about the provider’s capabilities, strengths and weaknesses.

Intangibles:  While creating an objective list of selection criteria is a must, there is also the “gut check” factor to consider. Before you select a vendor, consider whether this is the type of company you want to work with long term.  In public safety, nothing is cut and dry. The company you select must be a good partner in achieving your community supervision goals, and that often comes down to trust.

Posted in Monitoring Operations, Monitoring Technology

5 reasons the use of electronic monitoring is growing

Posted on February 28, 2013
| | | |

electronic monitoringIn 2011, the National Institute of Justice released results of a large study that found when offenders were placed on electronic monitoring they were less likely to fail conditions of community release. In fact, the study found the risk of failure dropped by more than 30 percent when agencies supplement offender supervision with electronic monitoring.

Federal, state and local correctional agencies now use electronic monitoring in a wide variety of settings, such as a pretrial supervision, as an alternative to imprisonment, or as a supervision requirement for probationers or parolees released to the community.  In many states, GPS tracking has been legislated for certain classes of offenders, such as sex offenders.

The use of location monitoring products – from GPS tracking to continuous alcohol monitoring to electronic monitoring and more – is clearly on the rise. Correctional agencies now have a wide range of options for electronic monitoring equipment and services, such as BI ExacuTrack® One, a versatile GPS tracking system, or BI TAD®, a continuous alcohol monitoring device that uses transdermal technology but also offers location monitoring capability.

The rise in electronic monitoring use can be attributed to several factors, including:

  • Electronic monitoring systems have been in use now for more than two decades. The technologies have proven to be effective in very challenging offender environments.
  • More technologies have been developed to match specific offender risks and needs, such as alcohol monitoring for offenders with a history of alcohol abuse.
  • The technical abilities of probation and parole agencies are much greater today. Many agencies have electronic monitoring departments with staff who have worked with electronic monitoring systems for more than a decade. These officers not only know these systems, but they also now push our BI research and development team to think of new and exciting capabilities for offender supervision technology.
  • Agencies are being asked to do more with less and, as a result, they are using electronic monitoring systems to assist with managing large caseloads.
  • Costs have come down. In particular, cell coverage costs have dropped, resulting in lower GPS tracking charges. The NIJ study estimated, in general, the cost of electronic monitoring was only one-sixth the cost of incarceration. For agencies coping with crowded jails and prisons, this low cost alternative to detention is an attractive option.

Of the more than 7 million Americans involved today in the criminal justice system, 5 million are being supervised in the community. For many agencies, the use of electronic monitoring is helping to make the task of supervising many of these individuals more effective and efficient.

Posted in Monitoring Technology

California lawmakers propose tough law for GPS tampering

Posted on February 22, 2013
| | | |

gps trackingCalifornia lawmakers have vowed legislation to make tampering with their electronic tracking devices a crime that sends offenders back to prison. The legislation was prompted an increase in the number of sex offenders violating parole and tampering with their GPS tracking devices.

Sen. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) filed what is known as a “spot” bill, intended to be filled later with language that makes it a felony to cut off a GPS-aided ankle bracelet. Lieu contends an increasing number of parolees are cutting off their GPS monitoring devices “because they’re convinced little will happen to them,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

Under California’s prison realignment program, which went into effect in 2011, parole violators serve their time in county jails instead of prisons. If county jails are full, they are likely to be among the first to be released early.

Lieu said state corrections officials reported 173 parole violators cut off their bracelets from October 2010 to September 2011. With realignment in October 2011, the 12-month rate jumped to nearly 300 violations. Sen. Michael Rubio (D-Bakersfield) is a co-sponsor.

A second bill, AB 2 filed in December by Assemblyman Mike Morrell (R-Rancho Cucamonga), would create new prison terms for paroled sex offenders who fail to register with local law enforcement.

BI offers several GPS tracking devices, including BI ExacuTrack One.

Posted in Monitoring Operations, Monitoring Technology