The Michigan Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative 

A Collaborative Effort of the Governor’s Office and the Departments of Corrections, Community Health, Labor & Economic Growth and the Family Independence Agency

 

First Year Status Report Summary

“The Mission of the Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Initiative is to significantly reduce crime and enhance public safety by implementing a seamless system of services for offenders from the time of their entry to prison through their transition, community reintegration and aftercare in their communities.”

 

Building the Organizational Structure to Create a Model for Michigan

 

The first meeting of the Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Advisory Council was held in October of 2003 with technical assistance from the National Institute of Corrections and the National Governors Association.   The 150 Advisory Council members immediately began the planning needed to implement a new approach for all phases of prisoner release preparation and transition back to their communities. The Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Initiative (MPRI) is based on a model developed by the National Institute of Corrections called the “Transition from Prison to Community Model” (TPCI) that is being adapted for Michigan and what has been learned in Michiganthrough the implementation of our Serious and Violent Offender Initiative (SVORI).   The emerging MPRI Model involves improved decision making in the three phases of the institution, release, and supervision process (See the MPRI Process Flow Chart on page 4):

 

• Getting Ready:   The institutional phase describes actions, events and responsibilities that occur during the offender’s term of imprisonment, from admission until the start of reentry. 
• Going Home:   The transition to the community or reentry phase begins approximately six months before the offender’s target release date, and continues until their adjustment to community supervision has stabilized—e.g., six months after release from prison.  In this phase, reentry elements are made more specific and detailed. 
• Staying Home:   The community and discharge phase involves the transition to eventual discharge and begins when the offender has stabilized on community supervision and continues until their discharge from supervision.  The final stage of the process is discharge of the offender and begins when the offender’s sentence or official supervision ends.  In this phase, it is the responsibility of the former inmate, human services providers, and the offender’s network of community supports and mentors to assure continued success. 

 

The emerging MPRI Model provides a framework for improving seven primary decision points spanning the three phases of the transition process.  Its lynchpin is the Transition Accountability Plan that is prepared for each inmate during the prison intake process and modified as the corrections process unfolds:

 

• Assessment and classification:   Measuring offenders’ risks, needs and strengths.
• Inmate behavior & programming:   Assignments to reduce risk, address need, build on strengths.
• Inmate release preparation:   Developing a strong, public safety conscious parole plan.
• Release decision making:   Improving parole release guidelines.
• Supervision and services:   Providing flexible and firm supervision and community services.
• Revocation decision making:   Using graduated sanctions and services to respond to behavior.
• Discharge and aftercare:   Determining the community’s responsibility to “take over” the case.

 

The enormous work of planning for implementation of new approaches for prisoner reentry began with a detailed assessment by the Department of Corrections of the strengths and weaknesses of the current system. This “system map” was the beginning point for examining what needs to be done in Michiganto reduce parolee crime (recidivism).   Next was development of an organizational structure strong enough to support the weight of the changes needed.   The initiative, spearheaded by Governor Jennifer M. Granholm, is overseen by the State Policy Team comprised of top level leaders from the Department of Corrections (inmate custody/education/training, the parole decision process and parolee supervision), the Department of Community Health (physical and mental health, alcohol and drug addiction services), the Department of Labor and Economic Growth (housing, adult education, vocational training, employment preparation and employment), and the Family Independence Agency (family and child welfare).

 

Decision Point Work Groups, drawn from the Advisory Council and representatives from these four primary state departments, were formed around the seven decision points, together with two additional work groups on Inmate Vocational Training and Offender Community Services.   These work groups generated hundreds of ideas on how to adapt TPCI to create a model unique to Michigan.   The co-chairs of each work group – one from Corrections and one from one of the other departments – together with a Resource Team from the Department of Corrections that represents research, policy, custody, inmate services, the Parole Board and parolee supervision – meet regularly as the Executive Management Team to review the emerging work and prepare recommendations for the State Policy Team.  The State Policy Team makes the decisions that drive the reforms that are the core of the new MPRI Model. 

 

Developing the MichiganPrisoner ReEntry Initiative Model

 

By March of 2004, the work groups and the Executive Management Team (EMT) determined preliminary goals for each of the seven decision points and identified strengths and weaknesses in the existing system.  With that work completed, the EMT combined the work groups into three clusters to prevent overlap.  Each cluster was assigned co-leaders, a facilitator, a trained recorder, a liaison to work with the other clusters and a researcher so that the process could be managed.

 

The entire Advisory Council was invited to participate in the cluster meetings in order to provide input and guidance to the process.   All total, over 120 of Michigan’s best thinkers and planners are at the table working on the design of the MPRI Model.  The work is organized around three clusters that address the seven primary decision points and is built on the initial progress of the nine preliminary work groups:

 

CLUSTER 1	CLUSTER 2	CLUSTER 3
•           Inmate Assessment & Classification •           Inmate Behavior & Programming (including Inmate Education, Voc Ed and Employment) •           Inmate Release Preparation	•          Release Decision Making •          Parole Supervision & Services •          Revocation Decision Making	•           Parole Discharge & Aftercare (including Offender Services)

 

By June of 2004, several specifically-tasked implementation committees were formed through motions raised and approved during the cluster meetings.  All three clusters contribute volunteers to each of the committees formed.  These committees and their subsequent subcommittees were created to move forward on specific elements of the MPRI Model that are the essential building blocks of an improved reentry system.  Logically, these committees focus on the decisions assigned to Cluster 1:

 

• The Assessment and Classification Committee is charged with determining the “best practices” to inform decisions about new assessment and classification instruments and procedures that could be adopted by Michiganand to develop evaluation criteria to recognize good assessment and classification options.   The members of this committee were selected because of their expertise in research and inmate assessment and classification.

 

• The Inmate Education, Vocational Training, and Employment (EVTE) Committee formed two subcommittees:  1) the Case Planning and Transitional Accountability Plan (TAP) Development Subcommittee and, 2) the Workforce Development Subcommittee, which was formed to plan offender employment services and preparation along several employment or employability “tracks” related to offenders’ potential for the job market.

 

• The Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI) Committee is charged with addressing the question:  What are the implications for the PSI with the revisions to the assessment and classification process, TAP and case planning?  Beginning in November, this committee will work “backwards” from the point of inmate reception to determine ways to incorporate the process of assessment and case plan preparation into the field prior to admission to prison.

 

• The Victims Services Committee to be formed in November will be charged with addressing ways the MPRI can serve victims’ needs and allay their concerns about offender reentry by improving the victim contact process, community and faith-based victim awareness programming and improved interaction on domestic violence and victim services issues.

 

• A Performance Measurement Committee will be formed in November with new MPRI partners from the Department of Information and Technology to determine how success will be measured for the overall initiative – such as reduced parolee recidivism – and for various decision points within the model.  The National Institute of Corrections is expected to assist with this effort.

 

• The Pilot Site Committee was formed and is comprised of key members of the Executive Management Team.  They are charged with determining the criteria for pilot sites to test the MPRI Model as well as the implications of site selection on the operations of state government agencies involved in the process.  Due to the timing of the budget process, recommendations for the MPRI for FY 2006 must be complete by November, 2004.

 

By September of 2004, many recommendations of the initial work groups, clusters, committees and subcommittees were approved by the EMT for immediate implementation because they did not require change in policy while others will be recommended to the State Policy Team on October 20, 2004.   The specific recommendations by the Executive Management Team to the State Policy Team on each of the MPRI elements so far developed are summarized on pages five and six. 

 

Achievements:   A Wall of Progress for Reentry in Michigan

 

Throughout the first year of planning the MPRI Model, the Executive Management Team attempted to demonstrate elements of the model – that is, one or more of the seven primary decisions points – in as many ways as possible.  This resulted in the creation of several “demonstration sites” that are laying the foundation for the development of full blown “pilot sites” where the entire model will be implemented and adapted as the work in the trenches operationally tests the changes to the corrections and human service delivery process.  Full pilot sites are expected to begin in FY 2005 with funding for gaps in local services funded in FY 2006.  Complete narrative descriptions of the achievements to date are highlighted in the full MPRI First Year Status Report.

 

These achievements are made possible by the combined efforts of the many managers and staff collaborating in the MPRI from the Department of Corrections – especially through Correctional Facilities Administration, Field Operations Administration and Planning Administrations - and our partners at the Department of Labor and Economic Growth (DLEG), the Department of Community Health (DCH) and the Family Independence Agency (FIA).  Without the work of the many individuals  working under the MRPI organizational structure, no achievements – nor progress – are possible.

 

This Summary includes the MPRI Process Flowchart on page 4, the summary of the emerging MPRI Model and the Executive Team recommendations to the State Policy Team on pages 5 and 6, and the organizational structure of the MPRI on the final page of the Summary Report.   More detail is available in the full status report. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE EMERGING MPRI MODEL

Summary of Recommendations to the State Policy Team

 

Getting Ready:  The Institutional Phase

 

DecisionPointNo.1:  Assessment and classification

Focus Areas:  Assessment of Risk, Needs and Strengths; Classification Issues

 

Recommendations:

 

#1:   Assessment Instrument:   The MDOC and the MPRI adopt a new assessment tool for measurement of offenders’ risks, needs and strengths.

#2:    Research and Development Approach:  A subcommittee be established comprised of members of the Assessment and Classification Committee, additional representatives of the MDOC Reception Center, the Parole Board, Field Operations Administration, additional partners from DLEG, DCH and FIA and treatment providers.  The subcommittee charge is to oversee and assist in the implementation of the new risk, needs and strengths assessment process and its integration into the MPRI.

#3:   Technical Assistance:   The MDOC issue a contract for technical assistance with the testing, norming, implementation and integration of the risk assessment process into MPRI over the subsequent three to five years.  The contract amount would not exceed $50,000 in Fiscal Year 2005, half of which will be funded with grant money obtained by DLEG and half of which will be funded by the MDOC.  Funding for additional research, development and implementation in FY 2005 and FY 2006 is expected to be achieved through a concerted effort to obtain foundation support.

#4:   Staff Support:   The MDOC Policy and Strategic Planning Administration, Office of Research and Planning (ORP), should ensure that it has the appropriate level of resources and capabilities to provide data, data analysis and other assistance, including the conducting of necessary program impact evaluations, in furtherance of implementing and integrating the assessment process based on the COMPAS instrument.  Recommendations from the administration will be forthcoming in November.

 

DecisionPointNo.2:  Inmate behavior & programming

Focus Areas:  Case Management, Employability (including standardized pre-release programming, Workforce Development, Real Skills for Real Jobs, Prisoner Education), Tracking and Recording Inmates’ Accomplishments, Family Support, Child Support

 

Recommendations:

 

#5:   Case Plan and TAP Formats: Approve implementation of draft TAP/Case Management Plans (attached) with continued input from staff at MDOC Reception Center.

 

#6:   Training: Develop training timelines, training model, curricula, and training tools for implementation and implement training for appropriate correctional staff on TAP/Case Management Plans. As a result of this development, the impact on partner agencies (MDOC, DLGEG, DCH and FIA) will be determined with recommendations to the State Policy Team regarding budget, staffing and policy.

 

#7:   Electronic Capability: At the appropriate time during the implementation process, involve the Department of Information Technology (DIT) in the development of electronic version of forms so that data can be shared within DOC and with other stakeholders

 

 

 

 

Going Home:  The Transition to the Community or ReEntry Phase

 

DecisionPointNo.3:  Inmate release preparation

Focus Areas:  Prisoner Identification, Medicaid Benefits, Community/Prisoner Interaction

 

Recommendations:   None at this time.

 

DecisionPointNo.4:  Release decision making

Focus Areas: Parole Processing, Transitional Housing/Community Based Halfway House Programs, Pilot Demonstration Sites

 

Recommendations

 

#8: Approach: The MRPI should include analyses of community assets, barriers and gaps to determine the extent of community readiness for re-entry and this analysis will guide the process of state/local collaboration to demonstrate elements of the MPRI Model and institute full Pilot Sites as early as is possible.

 

#9: MPRI Partner Agency Involvement/Local Implementation Teams: Each Demonstration and Pilot Site should have local staff from DCH, DLEG and FIA assigned or volunteered to work on implementation of the MPRI Model in their community. The MDOC should have representatives from both the Field Operations Administration (parole) and the Correctional Facilities Administration (prisons), assigned as well. This group will become the local Implementation Team after training and coordination issues are addressed.

#10: State/Local Agency Communication: Agency members from the State Policy Team, their representatives on the Executive Management Team and their representatives from the local Implementation Team should have a formal communication structure in place to aid in state/local information sharing and collaboration.  Periodically, all four groups will need to meet to assure opportunity for effective cross-agency and state/local planning.

#11: Staff Support: The MDOC Policy and Strategic Planning Administration should   assure that sufficient resources are in place to provide community education, training, monitoring and evaluation.

 

Staying Home:  The Community and Parole Discharge Phase

 

DecisionPointNo.5:  Supervision and services

Focus Areas:  Monitoring, Interventions, Advocacy, Referrals

 

Recommendations:   None at this time.

 

DecisionPointNo.6:  Revocation decision making

Focus Areas:  Intensive Detention Jail Beds

 

Recommendations:   None at this time.

 

DecisionPointNo.7:  Discharge and aftercare

Focus Areas:  Aftercare and Community Services

 

Recommendations:   None at this time.