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

Jail Beds Programs

Jail Incarceration Programs are prison diversion programs in which non-violent offenders serve up to twenty-two (22) months in a county jail as a condition of supervision, in lieu of a state prison sentence. Programs may include work release, drug treatment, work squads, or other self-improvement programs as directed by the Sheriff's office. This program is designed to serve as a final disposition to any case whose presumptive prison sentence may have been twelve (12) to twenty-two (22) months in prison. If the above criterion is met, this program can also be used for nonsecure drug treatment, PRC, or secure drug treatment failures.

Profiles of Jail Bed Residential Programs
On June 30, 2004

Facility Start Date Facility Capacity
Dixie County Jail December, 1994 20
Hamilton County Jail October, 1994 24
Jackson County Jail November, 1994 36
Madison County Jail October, 1994 24
Wakulla County Jail August, 1994 50
TOTAL 154
Average Per Diem on June 30, 2004 $32.00

Workload

Table 4A: Jail Bed Enrollment Data by Fiscal Year
  • Jail facilities began with more than 400 new enrollments in the start-up year, and dropped to about 200 beginning in FY 1997-98. This year’s enrollments total is 229.
  • For FY 2003-04, 309 different offenders participated in a jail program.
  • There were 150 offenders in the programs on June 30, 2004.
  • Since 1994, the facilities have served 3,872 different offenders.
Table 4B: FY 2003-04 Jail Bed Enrollment Data by Facility
  • The programs are generally small, ranging from 26 new enrollments for Dixie County to 69 for Jackson County.

Outcomes

Table 4C(a): Jail Bed 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, jail bed facilities had a 94.8% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits) from FY 1994-95 to FY 2000-01.
  • Success rates have been at comparably high levels since the programs began in FY 1994-95 (94.4%) to (95.4%) in FY 2000-01.
  • The proportion of offenders whose final program outcome is an administrative exit has dropped from 9.0% in FY 1994-95 to 5.6% in FY 2000-01.
Table 4C(b): Jail Bed Outcomes for Offenders by Fiscal Year
  • This table shows outcomes based on a two-year follow-up after the offender first entered a jail bed program. For FY 2001-02, the jail bed program had a 96.0% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits).
Table 4D: FY 2003-04 Jail Bed Exit Data (Event-Based) by Facility
  • Looking at the outcome of the offenders’ experiences in each program they exited, the success rate varies from 91.4% for Jackson County Jail to 100.0% for Dixie and Madison Counties.
  • On average, these programs had a 94.8% success rate with offenders exiting their program during this fiscal year. Administrative exits averaged 6.5% for the year.

Recommitments

Table 4E: FY 2000-01 (2-Year Follow-up), Jail Bed Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • At two years past program completion, recommitment rates for jail bed program completers (30.9%) are substantially lower than for program non-completers (65.4%).
  • Recommitments to supervision (for new offense or technical violation) are slightly higher for non-completers than completers (23.1% vs. 18.5%).
  • Admissions/Returns to prison for a new offense or technical violation for program completers are far less than that for non-completers (12.4% vs. 42.3%).
Table 4F: FY 2000-01 (3-Year Follow-up), Jail Bed Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For a three-year follow-up period, jail program completers remain much lower than non-completers in overall recommitments (45.3% vs. 75.0%).
  • Recommitments to prison (for new offense or technical violation) are much lower for completers than non-completers (26.4% vs. 68.8%).
Table 4G: FY 1999-00 (4-Year Follow-up), Jail Bed Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • While the overall recommitment rate increases, program completers remain significantly lower than non-completers in prison recommitments (29.7% vs. 68.8%).
  • Supervision recommitments are slightly lower for program completers (17.3%) than non-completers (18.8%).
  • About 47.0% of completers were recommitted, compared to 87.5% for non-completers.
Table 4H: FY 1998-99 (5-Year Follow-up), Jail Bed Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For this cohort, at five years past program completion, recommitments average 59.3% for program completers and 85.0% for non-completers.
  • Completers are somewhat higher (22.8%) than non-completers (20.0%) in returns to supervision (new offense or technical).
  • Completers are significantly lower (36.5%) than non-completers (65.0%) in returns to prison (new offense or technical).
Table 4I: FY 1997-98 (6-Year Follow-up), Jail Bed Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For this cohort, at six years past program completion, recommitments average 63.7% for program completers and 72.7% for non-completers.
  • Completers (45.5%) were less likely to return to prison (new offense or technical violation) than non-completers (68.2%).
  • Completers (17.2%) were more likely to return to supervision (new offense or technical violation) than non-completers (4.5%).