Sign In
  • InsideTrack
  • June 18, 2012

    Statewide, Evidence-Based Strategies Next Step for Criminal Justice System, Report Says

    A report on Wisconsin's justice system says judges should continue using evidence-based tools to reduce recidivism, encourages more problem-solving courts.

    Joe Forward

    Statewide, Evidence-Based Strategies Next Step   for Criminal Justice System, Report SaysJune 20, 2012 – Evidence-based initiatives are the key to reducing recidivism in Wisconsin, and existing and future programs should continue to focus on changing criminal behavior, according to a Denver-based division of the National Center for State Courts (NCSC).

    The independent, nonprofit court improvement organization last month released a 125-page report entitled “Effective Justice Strategies in Wisconsin,” the culmination of two years of research and information gathering on Wisconsin’s effort to improve its justice system.

    In general, it recommends expansion and use of risk-and-needs assessment tools by judges, greater support for problem-solving courts, and establishment of a multi-agency criminal justice planning committee to collaborate statewide justice system improvements.

    Judge Carl Ashley, circuit court judge for Milwaukee County and chair of the Effective Justice Strategies Subcommittee of the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Planning and Policy Advisory Committee (PPAC), says the report is a significant tool for Wisconsin’s justice system.

    “What this report says, and what the research tells us, is that communities can be more effective in changing criminal behavior without sacrificing public safety,” he said.

    Changing criminal behavior is important, Ashley says, especially considering the cost of lock-ups and the impact of incarceration on families and communities.

    According to updated June statistics, about 22,000 adults are currently incarcerated, tripling the number of inmates housed in 1990, costing approximately $32,000 per year per inmate.

    Incarceration may be the only option for offenders who pose a high risk to public safety, Ashley says. “But there are a number of people who shouldn’t be in custody because they don’t pose that type of risk,” he said. “By locking them up for short periods of time and not addressing their criminogenic needs, they are more likely to recidivate and go back into the system.”

    As the NCSC report explains, there’s a general consensus among criminal justice researchers that evidence-based practices, practices that identify the most effective response to change criminal behavior, are the best way to help communities reduce recidivism.

    Wisconsin has been testing these waters, and looking for ways to implement statewide strategies. The report, funded by a grant from the State Justice Institute in 2010, provides a snapshot of current initiatives with recommendations for the future.

    Assessing the Risks and Needs of Offenders

    Circuit Court Judge William Dyke takes the bench on a sunny June day in Iowa County. The docket might include someone convicted on a third drunk driving offense. Judge Dyke must make a decision about this person’s future. But what informs this decision?

    Since 2006, Iowa County is one of eight Wisconsin counties1 participating in a pilot project known as AIM (Assess, Inform, and Measure). It’s intended to help judges make sentencing decisions with more valid and reliable information concerning the defendant.

    AIM, established by PPAC’s Alternatives to Incarceration Subcommittee (now the Effective Justice Strategies Committee), sprouted from a growing national trend to find alternatives to incarceration. But judges wanted the tools to make those alternative sentencing decisions.

    In Iowa County, AIM targets repeat OWI offenders. An AIM report, generated by AIM staff, will assess an offender’s “criminogenic characteristics” to explore whether safe diversion from jail or prison can be achieved, and what existing alternative programs are best.

    Using the AIM report, Judge Dyke will consider what the research says about the offender’s risk of reoffending and what may be needed to change the cycle that has led to the offense.

    “This is information I didn’t necessarily have before,” Judge Dyke said. “Things aren’t always the way they seem. You read this report and learn more about the defendant’s situation.”

    One concern among judges, according to Judge Dyke, is that AIM-type reports take discretion from judges, who may feel compelled to follow a report’s guidance despite better judgment.

    Judge Dyke does not share that concern. “I don’t see it as a threat to my latitude or discretion,” he said. “I perceive it to be a helpful source of information so I can speak to a defendant about the underlying problem that is driving the criminal behavior.”

    For instance, Judge Dyke says the underlying problem is usually unemployment. “Will jail deter this person from reoffending? Will jail motivate this person to change? We have to be willing to consider new ways to break the cycle, especially given the expense of incarceration.”

    The NCSC report seems to agree: “The best way to improve outcomes and reduce recidivism is offering only those responses that are determined, by research, to be the best responses to the behavior of criminal offenders,” the report states.

    The report recommends that Wisconsin implement a statewide risk and needs assessment protocol, while enhancing the tracking component, and provide more training for judges.

    Other Criminal Justice Initiatives in Wisconsin

    Carl Ashley

    Wisconsin has been recognized nationally as a leader in the evidence/research-based initiatives and collaboration, but there’s much more that we need to accomplish. One of these important goals is to educate our community on what this all means for a safer community and reduced recidivism. The following are several other initiatives aimed at improving the criminal justice system in the state:

    The Treatment Alternatives and Diversion (TAD) Program, a grant program funding counties through 2005 Wisconsin Act 25, released its final report in December 2011. The report found that diversion programming significantly reduces recidivism. Offenders who completed programming were nine times less likely to be subsequently admitted to state prison than those who did not complete the program. The programs were also cost-effective. Diversion treatment courts yielded $1.35 to the criminal justice system for every $1 invested; TAD diversion projects yielded $2.08 of benefit for every $1 invested.

    In 2011, Milwaukee and Eau Claire counties were awarded multi-year grant funding from the National Institute of Corrections to implement evidence-based practices throughout their criminal justice systems. Only three counties across the nation were selected for this prestigious program. Dunn County recently completed a two-year evaluation of its treatment programs for offenders with co-occurring disorders (mental illness and substance abuse).

    Finally, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections is currently implementing COMPAS – an evidence-based risk/needs assessment tool – at every stage of its business process. Many counties are planning to implement COMPAS as well; La Crosse, Eau Claire, and Dunn counties began implementing it this past spring.

    Information gathered from these programs will allow Wisconsin to continue its effort to implement effective justice strategies.

    Carl Ashley, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge

    Problem-Solving Courts

    The most common alternative to incarceration involves problem-solving courts, according to the NCSC report, which hold offenders accountable while treating the underlying issues that drive criminal behavior. For instance, many problem-solving courts target substance abuse.

    “Today the accumulated consensus is that adult drug courts are effective at reducing substance abuse, recidivism, and costs to the criminal justice system,” the NCSC report states.

    Wisconsin counties have acted on the research. Currently, the state has 48 problem-solving courts in various counties, including 24 drug courts and nine OWI-specific courts. Six veterans courts are up and running, four juvenile drug courts, and one mental health court.

    “It’s been absolutely exhilarating to see the number of communities that are coming on board to use these types of problem-solving courts to intervene and be more effective in changing people’s behavior,” said Judge Ashley, formerly a drug treatment court judge in Milwaukee.

    More problem-solving courts are in the planning stages. All of them should use accepted evidence-based principles to achieve desired outcomes, the report states.

    “Those problem-solving courts that are more advanced can help other courts implement the best practices that are necessary to be successful,” Judge Ashley said. “In order to do that, there needs to be more coordination and support.”

    The NSCS report recommends that Wisconsin create a full-time, state-level coordinating position to provide technical assistance and training on best practices, as well as a Problem-Solving Courts Oversight Committee, among other recommendations.

    Criminal Justice Coordinating Committees

    The report states that multi-agency criminal justice coordinating committees, which bring system participants together to address criminal justice issues, are essential to bring about improvements and new initiatives. Noting that 37 county-based committees were operating in Wisconsin in 2011, the report recommended that Wisconsin also create a statewide committee.

    Before the release of the NCSC report, Gov. Scott Walker announced, through executive order No. 62, the creation of a statewide Criminal Justice Coordinating Council with 20 members.

    According to a press release in April, “the goal is to get a clear picture of crime and criminal justice problems in the state, improve cooperation among agencies and units, and set clear objectives and priorities.” Attorney J.B. Van Hollen will co-chair the council with Gary Hamblin, secretary for the Department of Corrections. The council will meet at least four times per year.

    “This report serves as a snapshot of what we are doing right, and what we can do better,” Judge Ashley said. “But it must be used in conjunction with other reports and initiatives.”

    In particular, Judge Ashley highlights the funding issue. “We need to stay focused on how to get real legislative change for the distribution of resources,” he said. “If low-risk offenders are diverted from incarceration, it becomes a local funding issue. We should provide local communities with the resources to implement programs that can change criminal behavior.”

    Endnotes

    1 AIM participating counties are: Bayfield, Dane, Eau Claire, Iowa, La Crosse, Marathon, Milwaukee, and Portage.

     

    About the Author

    Joe Forward is the Legal Writer for the State Bar of Wisconsin.


Join the conversation! Log in to comment.

News & Pubs Search

-
Format: MM/DD/YYYY