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, 2004

Facility	Status	Facility Capacity
Jacksonville PRC – The Salvation Army	Active	25
St. Pete PRC - Goodwill Industries- Suncoast, Inc.	Opened October 15, 2002	70
Pensacola PRC - Non-Secure Programs, Inc.	Opened January 1, 2003	40
Orlando PRC - Westcare Florida, Inc. (Original Vendor) Non-Secure Programs, Inc. (Current Vendor)	Opened January 1, 2003 Assignment June 20, 2003	80
TOTAL		215
Average Per Diem on June 30, 2004		$35.09

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 remained relatively constant from FY 1994-95 through FY 1999-00. Enrollments dropped to 645 in FY 2000-01 and to 228 in 2002-03, due to the anticipated closure of PRCs. Enrollments increased slightly in FY 2003-04 to 363.
• For FY 2003-04, 392 different offenders participated in a PRC.
• On June 30, 2004, there were only 97 offenders in the program.
• Since 1994, the facilities have served 9,951 different offenders.

Table 3B: FY 2003-04 PRC Enrollment Data by Facility

• Nonsecure Programs/Pensacola-PRC had 120 new enrollments in their first full year of operation.
• Goodwill/Phase 1 PRC had the highest number of different offenders enrolled in 2003-04 (164).

Outcomes

Table 3C(a): PRC Outcomes for Offenders by Fiscal Year

• This table shows outcomes based on a three-year follow-up after the offender first entered a program of this type. They are counted as successful if they completed at least one program, regardless of the number of programs they participated in.
• On average, PRCs had a 45.6% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits) from FY 1994-95 to FY 2000-01.
• Success rates have increased from 36.8% in FY 1994-95 to 48.0% in FY 2000-01.
• The proportion of offenders whose final program outcome is an administrative exit has averaged 7.6% from FY 1994-95 to FY 2000-01.

Table 3C(b): PRC Outcomes for Offenders by Fiscal Year

• This table shows outcomes based on a two-year follow-up after the offender first entered a PRC. For FY 2001-02, the PRC program had a 39.6% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits).

Table 3D: FY 2003-04 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 17.0% for the Salvation Army-Jacksonville PRC to 33.7% for Goodwill/Phase 1 PRC and Nonsecure Programs/Pensacola PRC.
• On average, these programs had a 31.5% success rate with offenders exiting their program during FY 2003-04. Administrative exits averaged 10.9% 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 2001-02 (2-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• At two years past program completion, recommitment rates for PRC program completers (41.8%) are lower than for program non-completers (54.5%).
• 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 less than half that for non-completers (15.4% vs. 34.9%).
• There is a higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (26.4%) than non-completers (19.6%).

Table 3F: FY 2000-01 (3-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• For a three-year follow-up period, PRC program completers remain lower than non-completers in overall recommitments (40.1% vs. 58.2%).
• The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical) for completers (22.0%) and non-completers (42.4%).
• There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (18.1%) than non-completers (15.8%).

Table 3G: FY 1999-00 (4-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• While the overall recommitment rate increased slightly from three-year rates, program completers (41.4%) remain significantly lower than non-completers (63.3%).
• The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical) for completers (22.9%) and non-completers (46.1%).
• There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (18.5%) than non-completers (17.2%).

Table 3H: FY 1998-99 (5-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• For this cohort, at five years past program exit, recommitments average 48.8% for program completers and 67.4% for non-completers.
• Completers are slightly higher (22.2%) than non-completers (18.9%) in returns to supervision, but remain lower for prison commitments (26.6% vs. 48.5%).

Table 3I: FY 1997-98 (6-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• For this cohort, at six years past program exit, recommitments average 47.2% for program completers and 72.6% for non-completers.
• Completers are significantly higher (24.7%) than non-completers (17.3%) in returns to supervision, but remain lower for prison commitments (22.5% vs. 55.3%).