Bureau of Prisons report to Congress on community corrections, Aug. 2018

EFTA00064989¶

U.S. Department of Justice¶

Fédéral Bureau des Prisons¶

Office of the Director¶

Washington, DC 20534¶

August 27, 2018¶

The Honorable Charles E. Grassley¶

Chairman¶

Committee on the Judiciary¶

United States Senate¶

Washington, DC 20510¶

Dear Mr. Chairman:¶

The Second Chance Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-199; codified at Title 18 § 3624 (c)(5)) requires the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) to transmit to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the House of Representatives an annual report describing the Bureau’s use of community corrections. A copy of the 2018 report is enclosed.¶

Sincerely,¶

Hugh J. Hurwitz¶

Acting Director¶

Enclosure¶

EFTA00064990¶

Utilization of Community Corrections Facilities Report to Congress¶

Status Report: Covering data from April 2017 through March 2018.¶

Legislative Summary: On April 9, 2008, the President signed the Second Chance Act of 2007 into law (P.L.110-199). Section 251(a) of the law, codified at Title 18 U.S.C. §3624(c)(5), requires the Director of the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau) to transmit to the Senate and House of Representatives Committees on the Judiciary an annual report describing the Bureau’s use of community corrections facilities.¶

The Bureau of Prisons refers to community corrections facilities or halfway houses as Residential Reentry Centers. Most Federal inmates are placed in a Residential Reentry Center (RRC) and/or home confinement during the final year of their sentence. RRCs and home confinement, two forms of community-based confinement, help inmates gradually re-adapt to the community after spending time in prison. Community-based confinement is a critical component of the Bureau’s comprehensive reentry strategy.¶

Residential Reentry Centers: RRCs help inmates transition to the community by providing a structured, supervised environment, and by helping individuals find employment and housing, complete necessary programming (e.g., transitional drug abuse treatment), participate in counseling, and strengthen ties to family and friends.¶

The Bureau makes RRC placement decisions based on each inmate’s need for reentry services. For example, inmates serving long sentences, with limited employment skills, little family support, no established home to which they can return, and limited financial resources have a much greater need for RRC placement than do inmates serving short sentences, and having positive family support, a home, and job skills.¶

Home Confinement: This program is most appropriate for lower-risk inmates who are not in need of significant residential transitional services. Inmates on home confinement are subject to curfews, in-person check-ins, telephonic monitoring, and sometimes electronic monitoring. Home confinement is substantially less costly than RRC placement; however, it is statutorily limited to the shorter of six months or 10 percent of an inmate’s term of imprisonment.¹¶

Inmates can transition to home confinement directly from a Bureau institution or from an RRC. Inmates placed on home confinement may be supervised either by RRC staff or by U.S. Probation staff as part of the Federal Location Monitoring program. Inmates are carefully screened prior to their release from a Bureau institution to determine appropriateness for direct home confinement placement. Many minimum security inmates who have a viable release residence and minimal need for residential transitional services are referred for direct placement into home confinement programs upon reaching their statutory eligibility date. Inmates who transfer to RRCs are expected to transition into home confinement as soon as adequately prepared and statutorily eligible.¶

EFTA00064991¶

Statistical Summary: Most but not all inmates are referred for transfer to community confinement (i.e., to RRCs, home confinement, or both).¶

Ineligible Inmates:¶

The following list comprises reasons why inmates were ineligible for transfer to RRCs or home confinement (including the total number for each category) from April 2017 through March 2018:¶

• The inmate was released to a detainer (22,304)².

• The inmate had a sentence of six months or less (9,125).

• The inmate refused to satisfy his/her obligation under the Bureau’s Financial Responsibility Program (2,243). $ ^{3} $

Eligible Inmates:¶

From April 2017 through March 2018, 34,738 inmates were eligible for transfer to RRCs, or home confinement. Among these 34,738 inmates, the Bureau transferred 72% (25,000) from correctional institutions to RRCs or home confinement. Of the 34,738 inmates eligible for transfer to RRCs or home confinement, 28% (9,738) did not transfer to RRCs or home confinement during this period.¶

Reasons why these eligible inmates may not have been placed in RRCs or home confinement include the following:¶

• The inmate refused RRC placement.

• The RRC denied placement of the inmate.

• The inmate had medical or mental health needs that could not be accommodated at an RRC or on home confinement.

• The inmate had a pending charge that might have resulted in his/her arrest if placed in the community.

• There was insufficient time to process an RRC referral (e.g., due to a sentence reduction, last-minute lifting of a detainer, or resolution of a pending charge). $ ^{4} $

• The inmate’s behavior in a Bureau institution indicated that he/she was unlikely to succeed in an RRC.

Among inmates who released through an RRC from April 2017 through March 2018, the average expected length of stay in an RRC was 136.8 days. The average expected length of stay decreased from FY 2017 (149.1) by 12 days. The following table provides data on the average expected length of stay by quarter.¶

Fiscal Quarter	Average Expected Length of RRC Stay
April-June 2017	145.6 days
July-September 2017	146.8 days
October-December 2017	132.2 days
January-March 2018	118.8 days

2¶

EFTA00064992¶

Recent Activities and Future Goals: The Bureau continues to seek ways to expand the use of community resources to facilitate effective RRC and home confinement placements for inmates as part of their community reentry. For example, day reporting centers are non-residential facilities that allow for programming and other services to be provided in a centralized location while providing increased accountability and security functions for inmates on home detention. This type of facility does not require the zoning typically required of an RRC which allows for substantial services to be provided in areas where the agency has not been able to site a traditional RRC facility.¶

The Bureau has solicited for Day Reporting Centers in three locations: Memphis, TN; Sacramento, CA; and Richmond, VA. The solicitations are for a maximum placement of 30 inmates per site. The Memphis location began performance on November 1, 2017, the Sacramento location is anticipated to begin performance on November 1, 2018, and the Richmond location was determined not to be a viable location.¶

A new RRC Statement of Work (SOW) was completed in April 2017. The revised SOW emphasizes cost savings while aiming to provide for the ongoing transitional needs of inmates related to employment and housing.¶

The web-based electronic RRC application has been implemented in all RRM offices and RRCs nationally. The program provides automated processing and tracking of RRC referrals and provides instant feedback on the status of RRC referrals. It allows for improved inmate RRC population management via monitoring of movement to and from RRCs. To date over 200,000 referrals have been processed using this system resulting in significant increases in efficiency and decreases in costs through the elimination of mailing and processing referral packets from institution to RRM offices and then to RRC facilities.¶

Notes:¶

1. 18 U.S.C. 3624(c)(2).

2. The vast majority of these detainers were lodged by Immigration and Customs Enforcement on non-U.S. citizen inmates.

3. The Inmate Financial Responsibility Program requires inmates to make payments from their earnings to satisfy court-ordered fines, victim restitution, child support, and other monetary judgments. One sanction for failing to satisfy those obligations is loss of RRC eligibility.

4. If there is insufficient time for the Bureau to process an RRC referral and the inmate requires the services of a community corrections facility, RRC services can be required by the sentencing United States District Court as a condition of post-release supervision.

3¶

EFTA00064993¶