Travis County Commissioners Court
March 22, 2005
Item 6
6. Consider and take appropriate action regarding recommended modifications to programming for inmates at the Travis County community justice center.
>> good morning. Mike trimble, criminal justice coordinator. I知 here to talk about -- to give the court a brief status on the program out at the community justice center. For the last couple of years Travis County has funded a construction skills program out at the state jail. We wanted to give a brief status on what's going on with that as well as some proposed modifications to programming out there. And along with us we have carla mcelroy from the community justice center advisory committee and carol coleburn, some of our partners who helped us. With that i'll turn it over to kimberly pierce with criminal justice planning.
>> good morning, what I would like to do first is give a brief -- I知 sorry, did I do that?
>> [feedback]
>> they are just adjusting it.
>> a brief background or overview with the focus program. If you will recall in $2,001,150,000 was approved for the vocational therapeutic component or the program that we had at the c.j.c. We first subcontracted with capital area training foundation and Austin community college and life tools who provided all of the programs. But over the past 2.5 years I wanted to point out some of the positive things that did come from the focus program. They did in fact build the Biscoe building, the classroom, a little over 800 square feet at the state jail as well as some --
>> the name what building?
>> the Biscoe building.
>> excellent.
>> it's quite nice, actually. You should come see it. But they did build their own classroom and they also built some dog kennels for search and rescue dogs for tdcj. There was some mame things that went on within the focus program that I知 extremely proud of. However, during 2003, we started to identify some major gaps in services or some things that we thought that the focus program could improve on. Mainly that was the lack of substance abuse treatment that was available or that was provided to the confinees at the cjc. Some of the outcome or performance measures was the lack of employment. We weren't able to find these folks jobs in the fields we were training them in. The fact that 50% or more were being rearrested shortly after being released from the cjc also something that was very alarming to our staff. At the end of last year, the catf and our department sat down and decided it was not in the best interest of Travis County or the confinees to continue those services. So what we really wanted to do was sit back and refocus our attention on some of the things that we wanted to improve on out there. Like I said before, the substance abuse training or treatment available to them is none. So I contacted counseling and education services and carol coleburn early in January, asked to see if maybe they could come up with a position that we could place out at the cjc using these funds of the court deemed appropriate that's where we really started a lot of our conversations. I think that I have met about most of the court members about reallocating some of these funds for that new piloted program. Something else within the focus promise that we really wanted to improve on was the lack of family support. The fact that most of these men were being released without any supervision, which we don't have control over that, but being released with no case management or post release case management. While they were incarcerated they weren't really receiving any rerelease case management. They weren't prepared to come back to our community. Transitional housing is another thing that we identified. So many of the men that are being released are homeless. I think the district attorney's office has a program that they are working on out there. So those are some of the things that we wanted to focus on for a new piloted program. First and foremost being a substance abuse treatment program, but then adding all of these different components to that. What we came up with, doctor Geraldine navy now our director of adult probation -- carol contacted her and she made a strong suggestion that we use a curriculum by the name of dr. [indiscernible] from colorado. Dr. Nagy was able to have this man come and have a week long training in February, we all attended this week-long training. Very girl. I think -- very beneficial. I think all one direction we all want to go. It's a 400 hour curriculum, six month program while incarcerated. Something that the focus problem did not have. Added all of these other components to that. A major difference between the focus program that we used to have, it was a six-week program. No post release case management, none of the components that I talked about, they are going to have a six month program with a three-month after care. We are really adding a lot more teeth, starting to talk about evaluation, outcome, performance measures, things of that sort. What we are here today this morning to request from the court to reallocate those funds from the focus program for this new piloted substance abuse program and allow ces to either post or start beginning looking to hire a full-time counselor at the state jail. Another thing that I think is a major positive, by hiring a full-time counselor for the cjc, not only will they be able to facilitate this new program, but they will also be able to serve a much larger population, meaning more [indiscernible] coming back to our community and trying to get them on the right track. We are going to start with 24 confinees, hopefully may first is our target date to start it. It's kind of hard to explain. But tdcy is willing to give us an entire building. Within each building are what they call housing pod. Each holds 24 confinees, what we want to do is start with one pod of 24 and eventually continue to build on the program where you will have a maximum of 96 confinees going through the program at one time. So the focus program was able to serve 60 a year for a six-week duration for five classes a year. And this program would be able to serve 96 offenders, 365 days a year. We are really being able to serve a lot more folks that are coming back to Travis County.
>> what I would like to add to that is that a lot of the components that we are looking at for modification of this program are based, you hear a lot of times evidence based practices. Things that have been proven in research and practice to be effective programs. A lot of what we are looking at is based on those models. The cognitive behavioral component where people become very aware of what they are doing, their commitment to change. A lot of these different components that we are talking about, multi-pronged approach to deal with the vendors, especially coming back out to the community, enhanced case management, a lot of those things are based on evidence based practices. I wanted to make sure that we are basing this on -- proven already in the research and literature. What we are asking from the court is to use existing fy '05 funds that were used for the focus programs to reallocate those to get this pilot started. Our plan is to come back and give a more fleshed out presentation about what we are looking at fy '06 fy 07 and give the court options.
>> what is the total of the funds.
>> 150,000.
>> I saw a proposed budget before, but not part of today's packet.
>> no, sir.
>> when do we see that if.
>> what we will do is bring that back when we do a more full presentation of the program model. There's still fine tuning we need to do on that. What we really need right now is to get this money reallocated so we can kind of finish having those discussions with some of the providers to get those numbers hardened up.
>> you are asking for approval of the different strategy basically. To redirect the funds and at some point we will see the transfer I guess into specific other programs or services.
>> yes, sir.
>> and this was an agreement that we reached really with the gateway construction early on. I mean, I had -- I had meetings with -- [indiscernible] all of us pretty much agreed that a joins still necessary, but looks like these other issues are probably a little bit more important at this time. We think.
>> yes, sir.
>> yes.
>> and I do want to make a point about that is we did have several discussions with capital area training foundation. It really was on mutual agreement. I think they realized having that great way program model within a corrections setting was very challenging for them to do. Likewise, you know, we were seeing how it was actually playing out in the setting. I think we both agreed that we would probably need to did a different direction. They did a great job with what they were doing. I think we all just mutually agreed that we needed to head a different way.
>> is the final integration of what we are doing going to involve the crime prevention institute and family forward?
>> I -- yes, ma'am. I have spoken with them and they are very interested. Again it's hard to really know exactly what services we are going to be able to provide until we get approval from the court. But I have spoken with both of those entities, they are extremely excited about providing some services at the state jail.
>> proven records in terms of doing precisely what it is that we want to have happen.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> ms. Cole burn has agreed to collaborate?
>> yes, sir.
>> absolutely. Counseling educations service has actually been one of our strongest partners in developing this program model. They put a lot of work into defining some appropriate curriculums and we look forward to continuing that partnership and actually delivering the services. They will actually be very involved, especially on the substance abuse treatment component.
>> additional services would require additional funding, we would use part of the redirected funds from the focus program to --
>> yes, sir.
>> okay.
>> I know this is not officially a demonstration project, for the state of Texas, but is there any way that we might be able to capture data as though it were a look alike demonstration project for the state of Texas? This is something if we prove that this works, it is such a much more meaningful investment within the state facilities that could have huge impacts on counties all over the state of Texas.
>> that's exactly some of the thoughts that we had. We were looking at this, especially because some of the program cuts that have happened recently, if we can get something established that is showing a prove very much track record of being effective, especially right now, talking in a different way about actually redirecting funds to more treatment options, that there's going to be an opportunity to show the state what can happen. Hopefully there will be funding opportunities down the road from the state.
>> these are still 100% Travis County inmates that we are providing services for?
>> yes, sir.
>> ms. Mcelroy is chairman of the advisory committee is not -- she is not a state manager.
>> no.
>> [indiscernible]
>> is the most telling measure performance-wise of a program, whether it's this or anything, the recidivism, wouldn't that be the most telling?
>> I think that's a -- that's the first thing that people look at. Since it's in an incarcerated setting, do you see them back in jail. We were seeing that with the focus program. We were seeing that they are there for a substance abuse problem, not getting help but yet going back to their problem in the community and then that's just being reincarcerated within at times days if not just several weeks.
>> so is this program so new or innovative or is this -- is this program an innovative program or is it something where we have history or an example of this proving out that this is what we ought to do? The reason I ask that, I can remember a -- talking a while ago about -- about the amount of dollars, whatever, somebody -- if you have a substance abuse issue, the private sector will generally tell ya that you can take that on, but the expense of it and the length of time, for some reason I知 remembering a year, now maybe there's not a dollar amount attached to that, but I would suppose that we would look at this, you know, after this model period of time, and go, all right, as opposed to trying to deal with 96 people, what -- what this program needs to be is more than 400 hours or more than six months, which means that if we're trying to stay within, you know, some sort of a budget figure there, that, you know, what we really may need is 600 hours of whatever. I guess we won't know that until we try this program and see what the recidivism rate is because I don't, unless you can tell me, I think that you just have, that basically is the major benchmark for determining whether a program is working or not. Given that you have somebody in a program for six months, then if they are released right after that, I guess we can find out because what is the average time that the recidivism shows up that most people return within six months or return within a year or usually is it a -- isn't a year sort of the benchmark time.
>> it is a benchmark. I have been working with this population for 15 years now. It's been my understanding if you are out for six months, you are doing pretty good. You are out of here, you are even doing better. It's really that first couple of months that you are out that's going to make or break you. The thing about it is, Commissioner, given any program. The longer you are in a program, the more successful it's going to be. The problem that we have with the focus program, the problem that the state had with their substance abuse program is that there was no after care in the community. Now that we are going to place that in this new pilot program, I think that you are going to be seeing a big difference in the outcome.
>> okay. If we don't see those numbers the way we expect them to be, i'll be the first one in front of the court to make further recommendations on how we can make improvements.
>> kimberly I知 --
>> that's what I really appreciate that you try something out, it doesn't work, you come out, we redirect the fund. So to keep trying to find the right formula. For people. I think it's a terrific thing to do.
>> it's certainly a family forward is going to be a part of the final model here, they are already one of our established social service partners, good things are happening for folks who are on the outside who are going through that program. So we have already got a track record with that particular agency. Certainly crime prevention institute has done a wonderful retooling themselves in terms of the focus of that particular one.
>> well, I commend you for -- for coming forth and giving us the statistics about the focus program kimberly. I mean, because that -- that means a lot of to -- to me. Somebody is coming fort and saying what we tried doesn't work, now let's try this. I guess my question is where do we go whenever we want definitive -- this works, I mean this is 2005, I mean,, you know, somebody is bound to be able to show us something about if you put this many resources into this program then you can take this -- this ill on I mean that we have in -- for the just in this community but I think probably in this country, so I would hope that what we do is we institute programs that have proven track records of this is what we are doing, I mean not to say that we don't have a pretty sharp department by, I mean, I知 always nervous when somebody says that didn't work, let's try this. Meanwhile you are trying all of these programs, you spent a million, and you know I commend you for let's try something, but I would really like to have things brought to us that say you know what, here are all of the records of what we need to be doing. You know for one I would rather affect 24 people if it takes the money to affect 24 people as opposed to watering down a system and trying to handle 96. I mean, let's take on 24 at a time. Even though they are going to be some -- some that's -- that's going to prolong the deal. But anyway.
>> and redirecting the money to something to find something. Just to get this approved.
>> move approval.
>> second. Now, in addition to staying out of our criminal justice system, we would like to see you put your life back on the right track, right.
>> > absolutely.
>> become a better family person, get a job, pay taxes.
>> child support,.
>> mentor, all of the good things that we expect good citizens to do.
>> yes, sir.
>> that would help recidivism.
>> any more discussion.
>> yes, one question, judge. That is in these efforts that you are making as far as redirecting of -- of the way things are going out there at the cjc, isn't it possible that we have looked at the opportunities for employment individual with Travis County, have we seen any results. I know in part of this we are trying to also get those persons back into the society, but also with employment opportunities. I know we have asked other employers to hire from the area, but what have we done to address some of the concerns which is employment for those persons that's been released from the cjc, have we done anything in that -- if we have, what are the numbers? You don't have to give me that answer today, but -- as far as numbers, but I would really like to stay on top of that. Because I would hate to see us out there asking someone else to do something for persons out there, and we resident doing -- we aren't doing anything. Is that any way possible --
>> I want to mention along those lines because you make a really good point. Part of this program model, with our enhanced case management, part of that is getting them ready for employment, helping with resume writing, job search, something like that. There is going to be definitely that component, another part of that this I really want to work on is better partnerships with the business community to kind of see where are those opportunities for these folks to get employment and one of those folks would be Travis County as an employer.
>> exactly.
>> I think we are going to be working on those as we kind of develop this model. We can get that information for you.
>> I would love to have it, thank you.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, March 23, 2005 10:22 AM