Skip navigation.
Home | About Us | Contact Us
Rick Scott, Governor
Florida Department of Corrections, Secretary Michael D. Crews

Florida Department of Corrections
Timothy H. Cannon, Interim Secretary

Executive Summary: Probation and Restitution Centers

Probation and Restitution Centers are community-based residential programs for selected offenders under Department supervision, and recently released inmates. The program consists of a four (4) to six (6) month Residential Program Phase (Phase I) followed by a three (3) to six (6) month extended Support and Follow-up Services Phase (Phase II) during which participants reside within the community. The PRC offers a sentencing alternative to the court while providing a resource for participants who experience difficulty meeting their court-imposed financial obligations to victims, the Courts, and the Department. Additionally, PRC's provide transitional assistance to newly released inmates during their re-entry into the community. The program provides a continuum of services that offer at a minimum employability, job placement and budgeting skills development and assistance; vocational and educational training through linkages to community-based employers and providers; substance abuse services; transitional housing; support services to facilitate successful participation in the community; and, other such services to promote personal responsibility, self-improvement and public safety.

Profiles of Probation and Restitution Centers On June 30, 2003

Facility Status Facility Capacity
Jacksonville PRC-Salvation Army Active 25
Goodwill Industries- Suncoast, Inc. Opened October 15, 2002 70
Non-Secure Programs, Inc. Opened January 1, 2003 40
Westcare Florida, Inc. Opened January 1, 2003 80
TOTAL 215
Average Per Diem $34.53

Profiles of Secure Residential Programs Closed during FY 2002-03

Facility Dates of Operation
Bradenton PRC Closed September 2002
Note: It was anticipated that the PRC's would not be funded after FY 2000-01. Closure of some centers was initiated. The 2001-2002 state budget did fund the program and a decision was made to outsource the services. Therefore, non-contracted program closures continued. A new program was designed.

Workload

Table 3A: PRC Enrollment Data by Fiscal Year
  • PRC facilities began with 1,077 new enrollments in the start-up year and have remained relatively constant from FY 1994-95 through FY 1999-00. Enrollments dropped to 645 in 2000-01 and to 228 in 2002-03, due to the anticipated closure of PRC's.
  • For FY 2002-03, 222 different offenders participated in a PRC.
  • As seen in the June 30th offender counts for each year, there are now only 68 offenders in the programs.
  • Since 1994, the facilities have served 9,569 different offenders.
Table 3B: FY 2002-03 PRC Enrollment Data by Facility
  • Due to the anticipated closure of PRC's, the number of facilities with new enrollments is less than half of the number of facilities in FY 2000-01.
  • There were no new enrollments after January 2002 in the Orlando and Broward PRC's and no new enrollments after March 2002 in the Pensacola PRC due to closure of those facilities.

Outcomes

Table 3C(a): PRC Outcomes for Offenders by Fiscal Year
  • This table shows outcomes based on a three (3) year follow-up after the offender first entered a program of this type. If they participated in more than one (1) program, they are counted as successful if they completed at least one (1) program.
  • On average, PRC's had a 45.4% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits) for the most recent follow-up period.
  • Success rates have increased from 36.8% in FY 1994-95 to 48.3% in FY 1999-00.
  • The proportion of offenders whose final program outcome is an administrative exit has averaged 7.3%.
Table 3C(b): PRC Outcomes for Offenders by Fiscal Year
  • This table shows outcomes based on a two (2) year follow-up after the offender first entered a PRC. For FY 2000-01, the PRC program had a 48.1% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits).
Table 3D: FY 2002-03 PRC Exit Data (Event-Based) by Facility
  • Reviewing the outcome of the offender's experience in each program from which they exited, the success rate varies from 20.9% for the Goodwill/Phase I PRC to 66.7% for Bradenton PRC.
  • On average, these programs had a 27.3% success rate with offenders exiting their program during this fiscal year. Administrative exits averaged 19.0% for the year. As seen in the prior table, many of these administrative exits lead to subsequent enrollments in other programs.

Recommitments

Table 3E: FY 2000-01 (2-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • At two (2) years past program completion, recommitment rates for PRC program completers (33.1%) are substantially lower than for program non-completers (51.4%).
  • This pattern holds true for each type of recommitment except return to supervision for a technical violation.
  • Prison recommitments (new offense or technical) for program completers are far less than that for non-completers (15.8% vs. 35.7%).
  • There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (17.3%) than non-completers (15.7%).
Table 3F: FY 1999-00 (3-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For a three (3) year follow-up period, PRC program completers remain lower than non-completers in overall recommitments (37.6% vs. 58.6%).
  • The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical) for completers (19.5%) and non-completers (42.1%).
  • There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (18.1%) than non-completers (16.5%).
Table 3G: FY 1998-99 (4-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • While the overall recommitment rate increases slightly from 3-year rates, program completers (45.3%) remain significantly lower than non-completers (63.4%).
  • The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical) for completers (23.4%) and non-completers (44.4%).
  • There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (21.9%) than non-completers (19.0%).
Table 3H: FY 1997-98 (5-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For this cohort, at five (5) years past program exit, recommitments average 45.4% for program completers and 69.4% for non-completers.
  • Completers are slightly higher (24.1%) than non-completers (17.8%) in returns to supervision, but remain lower for prison commitments (21.2% vs. 51.5%).
Table 3I: FY 1996-97 (6-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For this cohort, at six (6) years past program exit, recommitments average 47.0% for program completers and 71.8% for non-completers.
  • Completers are significantly higher (23.2%) than non-completers (19.8%) in returns to supervision, but remain lower for prison commitments (23.8% vs. 52.0%).