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

Florida Department of Corrections
Michael D. Crews, Secretary

Executive Summary

Secure Substance Abuse Treatment Programs

Long-term Residential (Secure) Substance Abuse Treatment Programs are community-based, full service, long-term substance abuse therapeutic communities (secure indicates a long-term program, not a program in a locked facility) with two (2) components. The Intensive Treatment Component (ITC) lasts up to Twelve (12) months. During the ITC, the offender only participates in counseling and therapeutic and educational activities at the residential facility. The Employment/Re-Entry component (ERC) lasts six (6) months, with a primary focus on successful re-entry into the community. During the ERC, gaining and maintaining employment is incorporated into the offender's treatment plan. The offender resides in the treatment facility while maintaining gainful employment in the community. In this component, the offender participates in a minimum of six (6) hours of counseling per week. The residential program is staffed by paid awake staff twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week.

Profiles of Secure Residential Program Facilities
On June 30, 2007

Facility Start Date Number of Beds
First Step of Sarasota, Inc.-Sarasota September 1991 10
Operation PAR, Inc. -Largo September 1991 166
Phoenix House* -Citra November 1993 214
Spectrum Programs, Inc. – (Broward & Miami-Dade Counties) September 1991 91
TOTAL 481
Average Per Diem on June 30, 2007 $50.56
* Formerly known as Daytop Ocala November 1993 – June 1999.

Workload

Table 2A: Secure Treatment Program Enrollment Data by Fiscal Year
  • Secure programs began with only (188) new enrollments in the start-up year (FY 1991-92) and have increased substantially since. In FY 2006-07, there were 1,151 different offenders enrolled in the program and (520) were enrolled in the program on June 30, 2007.
Table 2B: Secure Treatment FY 2006-07 Program Enrollment Data by Facility
  • The programs vary substantially in size. While First Step had 10 offenders on June 30, 2007, Phoenix House had (227) offenders.

Outcomes

Table 2C(a): Secure Treatment, Program 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. They are counted as successful if they completed at least one (1) program, regardless of the number of programs they participated in.
  • Secure programs had an average (39.6%) success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits) over a thirteen (13) year period.
  • Success rates have dropped over the thirteen (13) year period, from (44.9%) in FY 1991-92 to (44.4%) in FY 2003-04.
  • The proportion of offenders whose final program outcome is an administrative exit has decreased over the history of the program from (23.0% to 11.9%).
Table 2C(b): Secure Treatment, Program Outcomes for Offenders by Fiscal Year
  • This table shows outcomes based on a two (2) year follow-up after the offender first entered a program of this type. For (FY 2004-05,) Secure programs had a (48.2%) success rate (successful exits divided by successful and unsuccessful exits.)
Table 2D: Secure Treatment FY 2005-2006 Exit Data (Event-Based) by Facility
  • The success rate varies from a low of (38.9%) for First Step of Sarasota, Inc. to a high of (55.2%) for Spectrum Programs, Inc. - Pompano Beach.
  • On average in FY 2006-07, these programs had a (50.6%) success rate with offenders exiting their program during this fiscal year. Administrative exits averaged (14.5%) for the year. As seen in the prior table, many of these administrative exits lead to subsequent enrollments in other programs.

Recommitments

Table 2E: Secure Treatment FY 2004-2005 (2-Year Follow-up), Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • At two (2) years after program exit, recommitment rates for Secure program completers are
    substantially lower than for program non-completers (21.5% vs. 57.0%). This pattern holds
    true for each type of recommitment.
  • Completers (9.3%) are lower in total recommitments to community supervision (for either a
    new offense or technical violation) than non-completers (14.4%).
  • Prison recommitment rates for program completers are substantially lower than noncompleters
    (12.3% vs. 42.5%).
Table 2F: Secure Treatment FY 2003-04 (3-Year Follow-up), Recommitment Data by Level of Participation
  • For a three (3) year follow-up period, Secure program completers remain lower than noncompleters
    in overall recommitments (37.6% vs. 64.6%), and this pattern is true for all recommitment types except return to supervision for a new offense.
  • The greatest differences are for recommitment to prison (new offense or technical violations) for completers (24.4%) versus non-completers (51.4%).