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, 2005

Facility	Status	Facility Capacity
Jacksonville PRC – The Salvation Army	Active	25
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		145
Average Per Diem on June 30, 2005		$38.12

Profiles of Probation & Restitution Centers
Closed during FY 2004-05

Facility	Status	Facility Capacity
St. Pete PRC-Goodwill Industries-Suncoast, Inc.	Closed October 2005	70

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.  Enrollments dropped slightly in 2004-05 to 275.
• For FY 2004-05, 342 different offenders participated in a PRC.
• On June 30, 2005, there were only 90 offenders in the program.

Table 3B: FY 2004-05 PRC Enrollment Data by Facility

• Nonsecure Programs/Pensacola-PRC had 103 new enrollments in their second full year of operation.
• Pensacola PRC - Non-Secure Programs, Inc. had the highest number of different offenders enrolled in 2004-05 (125).

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 45.4% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits) from FY 1994-95 to FY 2001-02.
• Success rates have increased from 36.8% in FY 1994-95 to 39.6% in FY 2001-02.
• The proportion of offenders whose final program outcome is an administrative exit has averaged 8.2% from FY 1994-95 to FY 2001-02.

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 2002-03, the PRC program had a 28.5% success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits).

Table 3D: FY 2004-05 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 36.7% for the Salvation Army-Jacksonville PRC to 65.6% for St. Pete PRC - Goodwill Industries - Suncoast, Inc.
• On average, these programs had a 56.5% success rate with offenders exiting their program during FY 2004-05. Administrative exits averaged 13.6% 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 2002-03 (2-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• At two years past program completion, recommitment rates for PRC program completers (45.6%) are lower than for program non-completers (63.4%).
• Prison recommitments (new offense or technical) for program completers are less than half that for non-completers (14.0% vs. 40.4%).
• There is a higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (31.6%) than non-completers (23.0%).

Table 3F: FY 2001-02 (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 (47.3% vs. 60.8%).
• The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical) for completers (25.3%) and non-completers (39.7%).
• There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (22.0%) than non-completers (21.1%).

Table 3G: FY 2000-01 (4-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• While the overall recommitment rate increased slightly from three-year rates, program completers (46.2%) remain significantly lower than non-completers (62.7%).
• The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical) for completers (26.4%) and non-completers (46.0%).
• There is a slightly higher rate of return to supervision (new offense or technical) for completers (19.9%) than non-completers (16.7%).

Table 3H: FY 1999-00 (5-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• For this cohort, at five years past program exit, recommitments average 45.3% for program completers and 66.6% for non-completers.
• Completers are slightly higher (19.8%) than non-completers (17.2%) in returns to supervision, but remain lower for prison commitments (25.5% vs. 49.5%).

Table 3I: FY 1998-99 (6-Year Follow-up), PRC Recommitment Data by Level of Participation

• For this cohort, at six years past program exit, recommitments average 52.5% for program completers and 70.1% for non-completers.
• Completers are significantly higher (22.8%) than non-completers (18.5%) in returns to supervision, but remain lower for prison commitments (29.7% vs. 51.6%).