RD235 - Implementation Progress and Early Outcomes of Evidence-Based Practices - August 2008


Executive Summary:
This report on the progress of evidence-based practices (EBP) in the Department of Corrections responds to Item 387. C of the Virginia Appropriations Act which directs:

“The Department of Corrections to report on its progress in implementing evidence-based practices in selected probation and parole districts, and recommend steps to expand this initiative into additional districts. The report shall place particular emphasis on measuring the effectiveness of these practices in reducing recidivism. Copies of the report shall be provided to the Chairmen of the Senate Finance and House Appropriations Committees by September 1, 2008.”

The first section of the report introduces the reader to the scope, implementation steps, and operational definitions of EBP. EBP is not a single program but a layered process that includes the use of offender assessment tools, probation officer communication skills and intervention methods proven to increase an offender’s readiness to change, training and delivery of EBP-compliant treatment services, and comprehensive evaluation of program delivery and program outcomes. EBP involves a system-wide change that requires organizational development and collaboration with criminal justice partners as well as probation officer and treatment provider skill development.

The second section covers the reasons why implementing evidenced based practices is of utmost importance at this time. This section includes statistics about the rising number of prisoners nationwide and in Virginia, basic crime statistics in Virginia, and information about what other states are doing to respond to their crises of growing prison populations. Virginia’s new court commitments increase an average of 3.2% per year. A record number of 16,247 offenders are projected to be committed in 2013 (2007 Secretary of Public Safety Forecast). Of this projected number, it is estimated that almost half have been on probation and parole before being re-committed for a technical offense or new crime. It is this population that EBP in Community Corrections targets for recidivism reduction that research says is probable if EBP is implemented correctly and with high fidelity. Virginia, like other states across the U.S., is bending under the financial pressures to build new prisons. If Virginia does not implement alternatives to prison incarceration, the prison bed shortage is estimated to be 3,300 by 2013 with an additional 900 bed shortfall when temporary and emergency beds are no longer used. This would mean an additional three to four new prisons would be needed at approximately $100 million per institution for capital costs (or an additional $300 to $400 million), plus an additional $23,000 average cost per year (at today’s costs) for each prisoner housed in a major institution (approximately $76 million additional operational funds are needed).

The third section of the report outlines the programs found effective in reducing adult offender recidivism according to a massive meta-analysis study of over 500 offender programs conducted by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy in 2006. Using recidivism reduction figures from this study, VDOC researchers calculated that if EBP is fully implemented in all P&P districts, it has the potential to reduce probationer/parolee recommitments in a range from 600 minimum to 980 maximum per year. In addition to the cost savings from decreasing new prison construction and prison operations costs, Virginia would save on other criminal justice costs (victimization costs, police and court costs, and jail incarceration costs). These cost savings are dependent on how quickly statewide implementation is achieved and whether sufficient funding is available for EBP infrastructure and offender treatment needs.

Early outcome evaluations of the impact of EBP show several success markers:

1) unsuccessful case closings are down by 2% in EBP sites when compared with closely matched control sites;

2) technical and new crime recommitments are down 3.2% in EBP sites compared to control sites;

3) revocation rates in the EBP sites have dropped 4.3% over the control sites;

4) the percentage of white offenders re-arrested in EBP sites is 6% lower than white offenders in non-EBP sites;

5) approximately 4% fewer black offenders are recommitted and an additional 2.5% fewer white offenders are recommitted to DOC from EBP sites when compared to non-EBP sites; and

6) there are 2.7% fewer black offenders recommitted on technical offenses from EBP versus non-EBP sites.

These research results are considered preliminary because EBP is not fully implemented in the four original pilot sites (EBP leaders are now planning to train clinicians and probation officers about EBP-compliant treatment services) and not enough probationers have been exposed to EBP practices to have a statistically stable sample size.

The VDOC plans to expand the number of EBP pilot sites from the original four to nine sites in FY2009. VDOC needs the following to expand and institutionalize EBP: caseload control positions to handle P&P population growth and the expanded duties required for EBP; adequate funding for the necessary intensive treatment of high risk offenders; and funding for infrastructure costs including training costs, support personnel costs, Virginia CORIS, and electronic supervision.

If EBP programs and services are implemented with high fidelity, we expect that VDOC will see reduced recidivism and resulting cost savings such as those projected in the WSIPP study. It is important to understand that re-commitment reductions will not happen tomorrow – full EBP statewide implementation will happen incrementally as will cumulative recommitment and re-arrest reductions. With sufficient funding to continue expansion of EBP, we anticipate that approximately five new EBP Probation and Parole sites will be started each year for the next six years until all Probation and Parole district offices in Virginia are using EBP.

It is important to emphasize that VDOC can only achieve the estimated EBP savings in the form of reduced recommitments, lower arrests, and saved prison bed space if there is a commitment to the following: 1) adequate funding to establish effective EBP treatments and services; 2) comprehensive training of Probation Officers and treatment service providers on what we expect and how to deliver EBP services; 3) holding providers accountable for EBP-compliant services by fidelity audits and outcome evaluations; and 4) by using evaluation outcome results, determine what programs and services are ineffective, improve promising programs and services, and replicate programs that prove effective in reducing recidivism and recommitment.