Consensus Question 12a through 12j is divided into ten parts, relates to the Illinois Department of Corrections. The current League of Women Voters of Illinois position is stated below, followed by the updated consensus study questions on this topic.

Existing Position:

• The League supports correctional services that conform to national professional standards.

• The League believes that offenders are entitled to mail, telephone calls, visits from relatives,

  extended family visits, furloughs, the opportunity to voice grievances and access to

  information in their case records.

• Education and job training for inmates should be provided in conjunction with the boards of

  education, private industry and unions.

• The League supports pre-release planning to bridge the gap between prison and the

  community.

• The League supports mandatory supervised release and the provision of community services

  to offenders, particularly when first released. Technical violations of mandatory supervised release need to be carefully defined and uniformly reported.

  Consensus Questions:

  12a. Should offenders be entitled to humane treatment and access to healthcare?

  PRO: The 8th Amendment to the US Constitution serves as a limitation on the government to impose unduly harsh penalties on criminal defendants before and after a conviction. It specifically prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. Certainly, withholding healthcare would be considered cruel treatment. Additionally, withholding of healthcare can result in inmates in poor health being released into their communities, potentially being unable to care for themselves or find meaningful work which then results in a more likely return to prison.

  This healthcare must include mental health and substance abuse programs. In 2014, 45% of people screened for substance abuse upon entering prison were determined to be in need of treatment services, but only half of those in need received those services. Further, an estimated 75% of people released on parole without drug treatment for their addictions have been found to resume drug use within three months of release.

  CON: The population increase over the last 40 years (700%) has made it virtually impossible to keep up with and pay for the cost of healthcare for inmates. Resources are limited, and offenders should receive the most basic required care only.

  12b. Should all programs be evidence-based or based on best practices?

  PRO: Evidence-Based Practice in the Criminal Justice System is the partnership between research and practice. Research is used to determine how effective a practice is at achieving positive measurable outcomes, including reduction of recidivism and increasing public safety. Application of Evidence-Based Practice has been shown to reduce recidivism up to 30% on average. Evidence-Based Decision Making: From Principle to Practice ICCA Conference September 2013

Programs should always be evidence based whenever possible to ensure effective and appropriate outcomes.

CON: Developing evidence-based programs can be costly and time consuming.
12c. Should all rehabilitative and evidence-based programs be made available to all for whom they

are appropriate?

PRO: The Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform indicates “97% of all inmates will someday be released from prison, and society has a compelling interest in encouraging those inmates to address the problems – lack of job skills, substance abuse, poor education – that increase the chances of recidivism after release." Criminal justice and social science research has established that recidivism can be reduced and criminal conduct changed through effective, tried and true interventions. The High Cost of Recidivism, summer 2018. Reducing recidivism through rehabilitation and education must remain our primary goal.

CON: Prison is meant to be a punitive experience, not a training ground. If there is money that exists for training and education, it should be made available to the public, not to inmates.

12d. Should programs be tailored according to individual needs?

PRO: Criminogenic needs are defined as structural elements of a person’s life that personally led them to a life of crime; e.g., substance abuse, family and social relationships, lack of employment or education, mental problems. It has been firmly established that evidence-based programming that addresses the criminogenic needs of offenders plays an important role in reducing recidivism. If inmates do not have access to educational and vocational training to help them find jobs and they do not get assistance with their substance abuse and psychological problems, the chances of successful integration after release drop dramatically. Final Report of CJSR #23 While some may believe that programs should be withheld from high risk offenders, The Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice recommends that access to programming should be prioritized for high-risk offenders so that the programs are going to the places of highest need; and this will in turn increase the safety of our communities and of the prisons themselves.

CON: Tailoring programs to fit individual needs is more expensive than having a few established programs. Prisoners should receive only general educational programs that are inexpensive and easy to deliver.

12e. Should all offenders have access to program credits?

PRO: Program credits are used to award inmates with a reduction in their time of sentence for completion of educational, vocationa,l or rehabilitative programs. This is different from credits one might receive for good behavior. Program credits encourage the inmate to better themselves and create the possibility for a better life after prison. Time off for good behavior simply discourages prisoners from disobeying prison rules. Giving inmates an incentive to participate in the programs that can truly impact their lives and increase the possibility of success after prison should be the primary incentive that inmates receive to reduce their sentence. The Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform indicates that they believe giving sentence credits is one of the best ways to safely reduce prison population and to improve the safety of prisons themselves.

CON: Programs are another expense to add to the increasing burden of housing inmates. Those of us not in prison have to pay for vocational training and/or college for ourselves and our families. Why should Illinois taxpayers pay to provide these types of programs for prisoners? Prisoners who are repeat or violent offenders should not be allowed to have the privilege of attending programs. Program credits should be denied to some based upon the length of their sentence or severity of the crime.

12f. Is pre-release planning critical for successful reentry into the community?

PRO: Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform recommendation #20 deals with these topics and indicates that releasing an inmate at the end of a sentence without adequate preparation while in prison and without adequate support outside of prison is a recipe for failure. Building a Safe Chicago reports that successful reentry programs support a successful transition from a period of incarceration back into the community. Additionally, these programs, in conjunction with service during incarceration and post-release will reduce recidivism.

CON: Once individuals are released from prison, they should not continue to be a drain on taxpayers. It should be the responsibility of the inmate to seek out services, housing, and employment and plan for a successful release.

12g. Are adult transition centers critical in bridging the gap between prison and the community in order to ensure successful reintegration into society?

PRO: Adult Transition Centers give inmates a chance to live in a secure facility while continuing to learn the skills necessary to re-integrate into their community. The recommendation specifically recognizes that the use of Adult Transition Centers should be primarily reserved for high- and medium-risk offenders to obtain the highest public safety benefit. Final Report of CJSR (page 61) The transition to the community can be especially difficult for high- and medium-risk offenders who have been imprisoned for extended periods of time. To expect these individuals to have the tools they need to re-integrate successfully without help is unrealistic and will lead to higher recidivism rates.

CON: It should be incumbent on an inmate to plan for his/her own release including housing and other necessary support in the community. Adult transition centers are ineffective since they have rules but no special areas of confinement if rules are not followed.

12h. Should the length of Mandatory Supervised Release (MSR) be determined by completion of goals tailored to the individual rather than a strict length of time?

PRO: Mandatory Supervised Release, better known as “parole,” is in place to support a successful transition to the community and reduce recidivism. MSR completion should be determined by successful completion of positive behavior goals, obtaining employment and secure housing, not by a pre- determined length of time. Identifying goals tailored to the individual allows that individual to take more control over the path of their MSR. Removing those from the system that have shown successful re- entry also allows parole officers to focus their attention on parolees who are at higher risk of recidivism. Putting Public Safety First – The Urban Institute

CON: Utilizing successful completion of individual behavior goals rather than using a set amount of time for MSR simply adds complexity to an already overburdened system and could allow for disparate

treatment of similar parolees. Using a set amount of time as established by the Judge at the time of sentencing is simple and consistent.

12i. Should rules attached to MSR be clearly explained to the offender as well as expected consequences if rules are violated?

PRO: The rules attached to MSR must be clearly explained and presented in writing at the time of the inmates release from prison. Too often, parolees are subject to a large number of restrictions, some of which can be easily and unknowingly violated without any bad intent or harm to the community, which then results in a return to prison for a parole violation, and the cycle begins again.

CON. Individuals who leave prison are subjected to rules that they must follow. It is incumbent upon the released individual to know, understand, and follow those rules and to ask questions if there is any level of confusion. Taking personal responsibility for understanding the goals should sit with the recently released prisoner and is part of successful rehabilitation.

12j. Should caseloads be manageable so that parole officers are able to play a supportive role with the parolee?

PRO: It should be incumbent upon parole officers to play a supportive role with parolees in order to continue to drive positive behavior change. With smaller caseloads, parole officers would be able to provide individual attention to parolees in the area of program support and case-specific goals that will more likely result in a successful return to the community. Putting Public Safety First – The Urban Institute

CON: Parole officers are not meant to play a supportive role; they are meant to be an extension of the police to ensure that individuals who are released from prison follow rules that protect the community. If individuals need additional services they should be accountable for seeking them on their own.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

Illinois Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform Dec 2016
Blueprint for Smart Justice Illinois, American Civil Liberties Union, 2018
Building a Safe Chicago November 2016
Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council, "Illinois Results First", Summer 2018 John-Howard Association of Illinois-Unasked Questions, Unintended Consequences League of Women Voters Impact on Issues, 2018-2020

Putting Public Safety First: 13 Parole Supervision Strategies to Enhance Reentry Outcomes (Paper) (urban.org)

Evidence-Based Decision Making: From Principle to Practice, ICCA Conference September 2013

If you would like more information on this question, please contact Megan Willis, LWV of Naperville at megwillis86 [at] gmail.com.