Program Performance Report

Transcription

1 Program Performance Report Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program January June 2013 This report was prepared by Jimmy Steyee, CSR, Incorporated under contract #GS-10F-0114L from the Bureau of Justice Assistance.

2 Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program: January June 2013 Program Performance Report The Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) program, administered through the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), was created to help States and units of local government develop, implement, and improve treatment programs in State and local correctional and detention facilities. It also helps them create and maintain community-based aftercare services for probationers and parolees. Prison- and jail-based (residential) programs provide services to offenders before their release. In these programs, offenders are usually housed apart from the general population. Aftercare programs are provided in community settings after offenders have been released. RSAT programs provide substance abuse treatment and other services such as housing, education, and vocational assistance. RSAT grants are awarded to all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the 5 U.S. Territories American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (collectively referred to as States). States may use RSAT grant funds to support three types of programs: State and local correctional facility RSAT programs (prison-based), jail-based treatment programs, and aftercare programs. State grantees typically subaward funds to State and local correctional facilities and treatment programs. Grantees are responsible for ensuring subrecipients enter performance data into the Performance Measurement Tool (PMT). This Program Performance Report (PPR) is divided into two sections: (1) jail- and prison-based programs, and (2) aftercare programs. It should be noted that state-based correctional facilities (with a small number of juvenile correctional facilities) are included in the prison-based data section. 1 The following is based on self-reported data from grantees and subrecipients for the January March 2013 and April June 2013 quarters that had active awards. Table 1 shows the number of awards and subrecipient awards and the PMT completion rate by quarter. Table 1. Jail-Based, Prison-Based, and Aftercare Awards and Subawards: January June 2013 State Awards Subawards Awards (N) Completed PMT Reports (N) Completion Rate (%) January March % April June January March April June The reporting completion rate ranged from 75 percent for State awards during the January March 2013 quarter to 99 percent for subrecipients during the April June 2013 quarter. Not all grantees and subrecipients were operational during the reporting period. Programs may not be operational for many reasons, including administrative issues, a lack of program participants, a grantee/subrecipient that is not yet spending funds, or an award that is closing out. Table 2 shows the number of operational programs by program type. An operational program means that grantees executed program activities outlined in their application and spent award funds during the quarter(s) for which they are reporting. Awards are made in the fiscal year of the appropriation and may be expended during the following 3 to 4 years. 1 Grantees and subrecipients self-select their program type, which occasionally results in a program that is incorrectly classified. An example is a large county jail that reports data on the prison-based program questions. BJA is working with grantees to improve reporting. Future reports will reflect these changes. Page 1

3 Percent Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program: January June 2013 Table 2. Jail-Based, Prison-Based, and Aftercare Operational Programs: January June 2013 Quarter Jail-Based Prison-Based Aftercare Total January March April June Overall, there are more operational prison-based programs than jail-based and aftercare programs. Programs were operational in 52 States and Territories (not shown in Table 2). Participant-Level Key Measures for Jail- and Prison-Based Programs This section represents those programs that were operational and using BJA RSAT funds in January June 2013 and may not be representative of all prison- and jail-based RSAT programs (see Figures 1 6 and Tables 3 and 4). 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Total Enrolled Prison New Participants Total Enrolled Jail New Participants January March ,724 2,696 3,287 1,001 April June ,193 2,780 3, Figure 1. Total Enrolled and Newly Enrolled Participants in Jail- and Prison-Based Programs The total number of participants enrolled in prison-based programs during the two quarters increased slightly, while those enrolled in jail-based programs decreased slightly. The number of new participants in each type of program was consistent in both quarters. Overall, over 14,000 individuals were enrolled in jailbased or prison-based programs during both quarters. Figure 2. Participants Completing the Jailor Prison- Based Program and Released Of those participants exiting the program, the percentage who complete all the program requirements is the completion rate. Reasons for leaving the program prior to completion are listed in Table 4. The completion rate calculation can be found in the Key Performance Measures table just before Appendix A. Note that participants who exit prior to program completion because of release, transfer, death, or serious injury are excluded from the completion rate calculation. The completion rate is about 73 percent on average for prison-based programs and 79 percent for jail-based programs. Of those who successfully complete prison-based programs during the reporting period, over half are released to the community. Among successful participants in jail-based programs, about 75 percent are released to the community Successful Completion Rate January March 2013 April June 2013 Prison Percent of Successful Participants Released to the Community Successful Completion Rate Jail Percent of Successful Participants Released to the Community Page 2

4 Percentage Percentage Individuals Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program: January June Successful Completers 1546 Unsuccessful Exits 537 Release, Transfer, Death or Serious Injury 1609 Successful Completers 434 Unsuccessful Exits 163 Release, Transfer, Death or Serious Injury Figure 3. Number of Individuals Completing and Unsuccessfully Exiting the Program Over 4,100 prison inmates and over 1,600 jail inmates completed all the program requirements during January June Prison Jail Figure 4. Participants in Prison- or Jail-Based Programs with High Criminogenic Risks and Substance Abuse Treatment Needs 2 In prison-based programs, 97 percent of program participants who were assessed using a risk and needs assessment instrument exhibited high criminogenic risks and high substance abuse treatment needs. In jail-based programs, the percentage of high-risk/high-need participants increased from 90 percent in January March 2013 to 94 percent in April June Prison Jail High-Risk/High-Need Participants January March 2013 April June Prison Jail 68 Figure 5. Prison- or Jail-Based Program Participants with Individualized Treatment Plans About 53 percent to 55 percent of participants in prison-based programs have an individualized substance abuse treatment plan. In jail-based programs, the percentage of participants with individualized treatment plans is higher at 63 percent to 68 percent. Participants with a Treatment Plan January March 2013 April June The PMT questionnaire was recently revised to include a question about the type of risk and needs assessment instruments grantees are using in their programs. Future reports will include that contextual information. Page 3

5 Figure 6. Services Received by Jail- or Prison-Based Program Participants Through BJA Grant Funds: January June 2013 These bar graphs show the percentage of program participants receiving various services. Generally, participants receive more than one type of service while in the program, and all will receive substance abuse treatments services while participating in the program, although this may happen across different reporting period. During January June 2013, about 81 percent of prison-based participants and 71 percent of jail-based participants received substance abuse treatment serivces. About 80 percent of prison-based program participants and 65 percent of jail-based program participants also received cognitive and behavioral services. Cognitive and behavioral services include interventions that address criminal thinking and antisocial behaviors. Other Services Mental Health Services Jail Prison Housing Services Employment Services Cognitive and Behavioral Services Substance Abuse Treatment Services Percentage of Participants Table 3 shows the number of participants in prison-based and jail-based programs tested for alcohol and illegal substances while enrolled in the program. A positive alcohol/drug test indicates use of alcohol and/or illegal substances. Table 3. Alcohol and Illegal Substance Testing in Prison- and Jail-Based Programs: January June 2013 January March 2013 April June 2013 Program Type Prison Jail Prison Jail Number of Participants with Positive Test (N) Number of Participants Tested (N) 3,920 1,528 3,894 1,141 Participants Testing Positive (%) Over 5,000 jail- and prison-based program participants were tested for illegal substance use each quarter. The percentage of positive tests ranges from 3 percent to 7 percent. The low level of substance use is expected, given that this population is incarcerated in jails or prisons and the availability of alcohol and illegal substances is restricted, although available through illicit means. Page 4

6 Table 4. Completion Timeframes and Reasons for Not Completing Jail- or Prison-Based Programs: January June 2013 Participants Who Completed Program: Timeframe Page 5 Jail-Based Programs Prison-Based Programs 0 to 3 Months % % 4 to 6 Months to 9 Months or More Months Total 1, % 4, % Participants Who Did Not Complete Program: Timeframe 0 to 3 Months % % 4 to 6 Months to 9 Months or More Months Total % 2, % Participants Who Did Not Complete Program: Reasons Reported Termination for a New Charge 49 8% 46 2% Release or Transfer to Another Facility Death or Serious Illness Voluntary Dropout Failure to Meet Program Requirements Violation of Institutional Rules Other Total % 2, % As previously reported, about 66 percent of prison-based program participants and 73 percent of jail-based program participants successfully completed the program in January June Table 4 shows the timeframes during which jailand prison-based program participants exited the program (both successfully and unsuccessfully). It also shows the reasons why participants exited unsuccessfully. For prison-based programs, 77 percent of participants who completed the program did so in 4 to 9 months. Generally, prison-based participation should be limited to inmates with 6 to 12 months remaining in their confinement. This is so they can be released from incarceration instead of being returned to the general prison population following program completion. The data are consistent with that model. For jail-based programs, 89 percent of participants who completed the program did so in the first 6 months. Jailbased programs require at least 3 months of treatment programming. Of those participants who did not complete the prison-based program, 49 percent exited in the first 3 months, compared with 86 percent of those in the jail-based program. The difference is to be expected, because jail-based participants generally have shorter sentences and terms of release. For prison-based programs, the most common reasons given for participants exiting the program without completing all the requirements include failure to meet program requirements (33 percent), followed by a violation of institutional rules (25 percent) and release or transfer to another facility (24 percent). For jail-based programs, the most common reasons given for participants exiting the program without completing all the requirements are violation of institutional rules (28 percent), followed by release or transfer to another facility (25 percent) and failure to meet program requirements (19 percent). The differences between the jail-based and prison-based RSAT programs are worth noting. Many can be attributed to the difference between jail and prisons, such as average length of stay and severity of offense.

7 The findings are based on only two quarters of data for a subset of jail- and prison-based programs using BJA funds which may not be generalizable to all prison- and jail-based RSAT programs. Participant-Level Key Measures for Aftercare Programs The funding authorization allows for creating and maintaining community-based aftercare services for offenders: States may use up to 10 percent of their total RSAT award for treatment of parolees for up to 1 year after they have been released from a correctional facility. 3 Aftercare services involve the coordination between correctional treatment programs and other social service and rehabilitation programs, such as education and job training, parole supervision, halfway houses, self-help, and peer-group programs. In January June 2013, 58 subrecipients in 10 States and Territories (i.e., correctional facilities) have operational aftercare programs. This section represents those programs that were using BJA RSAT funds during January June 2013 and may not be representative of all aftercare programs (see Figures 7 11 and Tables 5 and 6) Total Enrolled (N=32,26) New Participants (N=32,26) New Participants with a Case Plan (N=32,26) January March April June Figure 7. Enrolled Aftercare Program Participants and New Participants with a Case Plan The number of individuals enrolled in aftercare programs decreased in April June 2013, as did the number of new participants enrolled in that quarter compared with January March The decrease is partially attributable to a drop in the total number of active aftercare programs reporting during April June The number of new participants with a case plan tracks closely with total number of new participants. The next set of bar graphs in Figure 7 displays the percentage of new participants enrolled in aftercare programs with an individualized case plan. 3 Bureau of Justice Assistance. (2005). Program update: Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners (RSAT) program (Publication No. NCJ ). Washington, DC: Author. Page 6

8 Number of Individuals Percentage Percentage Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program: January June 2013 Figure 8. New Aftercare Program Participants with a Case Plan (%), and High-Risk/High-Need Participants 4 This graph shows the percentage of new aftercare program participants with a case plan, and the percentage of participants with high substance abuse treatment needs and who have high criminogenic risk factors as determined by a risk/needs assessment. The percentage of new participants with a case plan was 98 percent in January March 2013 and 79 percent in April June The percentage of high-risk/high-need participants ranged from 92 percent to 97 percent. BJA has begun collecting data on the assessment instruments used by grantees. Subsequent analysis will help determine the most common risk/needs assessment instruments used by aftercare programs January March 2013 April June New Participants with a Case Plan (%) High-Risk/High-Need Participants (%) 97 Figure 9. Participants Successfully Completing the Aftercare Program or Exiting the Program, and Completion Rate (%) January March 2013 April June 2013 Number of Individuals Completing the Program Number of Individuals Unsuccessfully Exiting the Program Completion Rate (%) These bar graphs show the number of participants exiting the aftercare program, those exiting the program successfully by completing all program requirements, and the completion rate. Reasons for leaving the program prior to completion are listed in Table 6. The completion rate calculation can be found in the Key Performance Measures table just before Appendix A. As mentioned previously, participants who exit prior to program completion because of release, transfer, death, or serious injury are excluded from the completion rate calculation. The completion rate decreased from 46 percent in January March 2013 to 36 percent in April June Past iterations of RSAT Program Performance Report showed aftercare completion rates ranging from 53 percent to 60 percent. 5 4 The PMT questionnaire was recently revised to include a question about the type of risk and needs assessment instruments grantees are using in their programs. Subsequent iterations of this report will include that contextual information. 5 Steyee, J. (2012). Program performance report: Residential substance abuse treatment program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Available online: Page 7

9 Individuals Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program: January June 2013 Figure 10. Number of Individuals Successfully Completing the Program, and Unsuccessful Exits During January June 2013, more people were terminated from the program than successfully completed all of the program requirements. Terminated is defined as exiting the program because of a new charge, voluntarily dropping out (if not on parole or court supervision), a failure to meet program requirements, or absconding Successful Completers Individuals Terminated Release, Transfer, Death or Serious Injury 21 Figure 11. Services Received by Aftercare Program Participants Through BJA Grant Funds: January June 2013 Similarly to services for jail- and prison-based program participants reported in Figure 6, these bar graphs show the percentage of aftercare program participants receiving various services. Generally, participants receive more than one type of service while in the program, and all will receive substance abuse treatment services while participating. Overall, about 64 percent of aftercare participants received substance abuse treatment services during both reporting periods. About 60 percent of participants also received cognitive and behavioral services. Cognitive and behavioral services include interventions that address criminal thinking and antisocial behaviors. Finally, about 20 percent of participants received employment services during the reporting periods examined. Other Services Mental Health Services Housing Services April June 2013 January March 2013 Employment Services Cognitive and Behavioral Services Substance Abuse Treatment Services Percentage of Participants Table 5 shows the number of aftercare program participants tested for alcohol and illegal substances, and of those, the number who tested positive for illegal substance use. Table 5. Alcohol and Illegal Substance Testing in Aftercare Programs: January June 2013 January March 2013 April June 2013 Number of Participants with Positive Test (N) Number of Participants Tested (N) Participants Testing Positive (%) 20 9 Page 8

10 In January March 2013, about 20 percent of drug tests were positive, indicating substance abuse usage while participating in the aftercare program. However, in April June 2013, grantees reportedly conducted more tests (531 versus 318), which yielded fewer positive tests. The percentage of positive drug/alcohol tests dropped from 20 percent in January March 2013 to 9 percent in April June Previous analysis of PMT RSAT aftercare data resulted in a positive drug testing rate of about 21 percent. 6 Table 6. Completion Timeframes and Reasons for Not Completing Aftercare Programs: January June 2013 Participants Who Completed Program: Timeframe N % 0 to 3 Months 61 36% 4 to 6 Months to 9 Months or More Months 16 9 Total % Participants Who Did Not Complete Program: Timeframe 0 to 3 Months % 4 to 6 Months to 9 Months or More Months 21 8 Total % Participants Who Did Not Complete Program: Reasons Reported Termination for a New Charge 47 18% Release or Transfer to Another Facility 20 8 Death or Serious Illness 1 0 Voluntary Dropout Failure to Meet Program Requirements Absconded 16 6 Other 14 5 Total % As previously reported, the successful completion rate ranges from 36 percent to 60 percent. Table 6 shows the timeframes during which aftercare participants exited the program (both successfully and unsuccessfully) in January June It also shows the reasons that participants exited the program unsuccessfully. About 44 percent of participants successfully exited the program during the 4- to 6-month timeframe. For those participants who did not complete the program in January June 2013, 65 percent left the program in the first 3 months. The most common reasons cited for not completing the aftercare program include failure to meet program requirements (40 percent), voluntary dropout (22 percent), and termination for a new charge (18 percent). 6 Steyee (2012). Page 9

11 Observations A total of 5,748 jail- and prison-based RSAT program participants and 170 aftercare participants successfully completed the program during the 6 months covered in this report. The time to completion for the majority of participants was no more than 9 months for jail-, prison-based, and aftercare programs. However, some differences were observed between jail- and prison-based RSAT programs. The time to completion for 89 percent of jail-based program participants was up to 6 months. The average time to completion for prison-based programs was longer, as expected. For prison-based program participants, 88 percent completed in up to 9 months. Of those who quit the program early, 86 percent of jail-based program participants did so in the first 3 months, compared with 49 percent of prison-based program participants and 65 percent of aftercare program participants. Over 90 percent of individuals who were assessed exhibited high criminogenic risk and substance abuse treatment needs in all program types. Other than substance abuse treatment, the most common types of services provided were cognitive and behavioral treatment services. Page 10

12 Key Performance Measures Measure Participants with High Criminogenic Risk and Substance Abuse Treatment Needs Jail/Prison and Aftercare Successful Completion Rate Jail/Prison and Aftercare Participants Testing Positive for Using Illegal Substances Jail/Prison and Aftercare New Participants with an Individualized Treatment Plan (Case Plan) A. Number of participants assessed as having high criminogenic risks and needs B. Number of participants assessed using a risk assessment instrument % High risk = A/B Data Elements Used to Calculate Measure Definition Interpretation Percentage of participants identified using a valid screening/assessment instrument as having high criminogenic risks and needs. A. Number of participants successfully completing program requirements B. Number of participants terminated for a new charge C. Number of participants who dropped out D. Number of participants who did not complete due to failure to meet program requirements E. Number of participants who did not complete for violating institutional rules F. Number who failed for other reasons % Successful = A/(A+B+C+D+E+F) A. Number of participants who tested positive for drug or alcohol use B. Number of participants tested % Positive Drug or Alcohol Test = A/B A. Number of new participants with a case plan B. Number of new participants % Case Plan = A/B Number of participants who successfully completed the program. Percentage of participants who have failed drug and alcohol tests while in the program. Percent of participants who receive an individualized treatment plan upon entering the program. Assess the percentage of drug court participants who have high criminogenic risks and needs; participants with high criminogenic risks and needs are at higher risk for reoffending compared with low- and medium-risk individuals. Assesses how many participants have successfully completed program requirements as determined by the drug court program; can also be thought of as the graduation rate. Assesses how many participants continue to use substances while in the program; also assesses the use of drug and alcohol testing as a key component of the program. Assesses the percentage of new participants entering the program who are receiving individually tailored treatment plans. Jail/Prison and Aftercare Successful Program Completers Released from Jail/Prison Entering the Community Jail/Prison Only A. Number of participants successfully completing program requirements and released from incarceration B. Number of participants successfully completing program requirements % Case Plan = A/B Percent of participants completing all program requirements and released from incarceration. Assesses the percentage of successful program participants released from incarceration into their communities. Page 11

13 Appendix A. Data from Prison-Based Program Grantees and Subrecipients: January June 2013 This table presents the key measures for individual grantees and subrecipients. Organization American Samoa Criminal Justice Planning Agency American Samoa Criminal Justice Planning Agency Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (Davis) Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (Davis) Puerto Rico Department of and Rehabilitation Puerto Rico Department of and Rehabilitation State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period AmSa 2010-RT-BX-0038 $ 114, April June 2013 No AmSa 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 No MD 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 0 0 ** ** ** ** ** MD 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 0 0 ** 3 ** ** ** PR 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 No PR 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 No Alaska Dept. of Public Safety AK 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 No Alabama Dept. of AL 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Alabama Dept. of AL 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** AR Department of Community Correction AR Department of Community Correction AR 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes AR 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Arkansas Dept. of AR 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Arkansas Dept. of AR 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes AR Department of Community Correction AR 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Arizona Department of AZ 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 34 0 ** Arizona Department of Juvenile Arizona Department of Juvenile AZ 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** AZ 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Arizona Department of AZ 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 53 0 ** Colorado Department of CO 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Colorado Department of CO 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes DE Department of DE 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes DE Department of DE 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes DE Division of Youth Rehabilitative Services DE Division of Youth Rehabilitative Services DE 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes DE 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Florida Dept. of FL 2011-RT-BX ,141, January March 2013 Yes ** Florida Dept. of FL 2011-RT-BX ,141, April June 2013 Yes ** Department of (Probation RSAT) Fund contractors Department of (Probation RSAT) Fund contractors Department of (Probation RSAT) Fund contractors GA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes GA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes GA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Guam Department of GU 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 18 0 ** Page 12 Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%)

14 Organization State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period Guam Department of GU 2009-RT-BX-0012 $ 36, April June 2013 Yes Department of Public Safety, Program Services Department of Public Safety, Program Services HI 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes HI 2009-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes State Training School IA 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes State Training School IA 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Idaho Department of Correction ID 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Idaho Department of Correction ID 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Illinois Department of IL 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Illinois Department of IL 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice IL 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Indiana Department of Correction IN 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Indiana Department of Correction IN 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Indiana Department of Correction IN 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Indiana Department of Correction IN 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Kansas Department of KS 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Kansas Department of KS 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Department of Juvenile Justice KY 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Department of Juvenile Justice KY 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Department of Juvenile Justice KY 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Department of Juvenile Justice KY 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes LA DPS&C LA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes LA DPS&C LA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Concordia Parish Sheriff s Department LA 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Concordia Parish Sheriff s Department LA 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Massachusetts Department of Correction Massachusetts Department of Correction MA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** 100 ** MA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** 100 ** Bristol Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Bristol Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Hampshire Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Hampshire Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Maine Department of ME 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%) Page 13

15 Organization State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period Maine Department of ME 2012-RT-BX-0019 $ 35, April June 2013 Yes Michigan Department of MI 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Michigan Department of MI 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Minnesota Department of MN 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Minnesota Department of MN 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Missouri Department of, DORS Missouri Department of, DORS MO 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes MO 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Bolivar County Correctional Facility MS 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Bolivar County Correctional Facility MS 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** MS Department of MS 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes MS Department of MS 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety NC 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 No ** RSAT Dan River NC 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes RSAT Dan River NC 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes RSAT Polk 2010 NC 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** RSAT Polk 2010 NC 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** RSAT Southern 2010 NC 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 0 0 ** ** ** ** ** RSAT Southern 2010 NC 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 0 0 ** ** ** ** ** Nebraska Department of Correctional Services Nebraska Department of Correctional Services NE 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes NE 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Juvenile Justice Commission NJ 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Juvenile Justice Commission NJ 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes NJ Dept. of NJ 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** NJ Dept. of NJ 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes New Mexico Department NM 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes New Mexico Department NM 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Nevada Department of NV 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Nevada Department of NV 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Nevada Department of NV 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Nevada Department of NV 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** New York State Department of Correctional Services New York State Department of Correctional Services NY 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** NY 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Alvis, Inc. dba Alvis House FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Alvis, Inc. dba Alvis House FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Department of OK 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Pennsylvania Dept. of Pennsylvania Dept. of PA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 17 0 ** 0 71 ** 100 PA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 76 8 ** ** Page 14 Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%)

16 Organization Pennsylvania Dept. of Pennsylvania Dept. of Department of Children, Youth & Families Department of Children, Youth & Families State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period PA 2011-RT-BX-0046 $ 250, January March 2013 Yes PA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** RI 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes RI 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Department of RI 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Department of RI 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes South Carolina Department of South Carolina Department of SC 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes SC 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Office of The Governor* SD 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 No Office of The Governor* SD 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 No Office of The Governor* SD 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 No Office of The Governor* SD 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 No Office of The Governor* SD 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 No Office of The Governor* SD 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 No Tennessee Department of Correction* TN 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Tennessee Department of Correction* TN 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Tennessee Department of Correction* TN 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Tennessee Department of Correction* TN 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Virginia Department of /RSAT Virginia Department of /RSAT Department of Justice 2010 RSAT Program Department of Justice 2010 RSAT Program VA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes VA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes VI 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes VI 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** 100 ** Office of the Governor VI 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 No ** 100 ** Wisconsin Department of RSAT WI 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes West Virginia Division of WV 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Grantee indicated grant funds are used for training and therefore did not report data on program participants. * Duplicate date entry. ** Division error (can t divide by zero)/grantee reported zero. Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%) Page 15

17 Appendix B. Data from Jail-Based Program Grantees and Subrecipients: January June 2013 This table presents the key measures for individual grantees and subrecipients. Organization American Samoa Criminal Justice Planning Agency American Samoa Criminal Justice Planning Agency American Samoa Criminal Justice Planning Agency State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period AmSa 2010-RT-BX-0038 $114, April June 2013 No ** ** ** ** ** ** ** AmSa 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 No 23 0 ** AmSa 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 No 23 0 ** Coconino County Sheriff s Office AZ 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Coconino County Sheriff s Office AZ 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Sacramento County, Sheriff s Department CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Riverside County, Sheriff s Department CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Tulare County, Sheriff s Department* CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Tulare County, Sheriff s Department* CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Tulare County, Sheriff s Department CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Orange County Board of Commissioners Orange County Board of Commissioners Twin Falls County/ Misdemeanor Adult Probation Twin Falls County/ Misdemeanor Adult Probation FL 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes FL 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ID 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** 0 47 ** ID 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** 0 67 ** Department of KY 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Department of KY 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Berkshire Sheriff s Office MA 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Berkshire Sheriff s Office MA 2009-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Barnstable Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Barnstable Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Essex Sheriff s Department MA 2011-RT-BX-0026 $30, January March 2013 Yes Essex Sheriff s Department MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Franklin Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Franklin Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Middlesex Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Middlesex Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Plymouth Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Plymouth Sheriff s Office MA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 24 0 ** York County Sheriff s Office ME 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** York County Sheriff s Office ME 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** County of St. Clair Sheriff Department MI 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes County of St. Clair Sheriff Department* MI 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%) Page 16

18 Organization State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period County of St. Clair Sheriff Department MI 2012-RT-BX-0018 $ 47, January March 2013 Yes County of St. Clair Sheriff Department* MI 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes St. Louis County, Justice Services MO 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** St. Louis County, Justice Services MO 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Butte/Silver Bow Family Drug Court MT 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Butte/Silver Bow Family Drug Court MT 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Yellowstone County Sheriff s Office MT 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Yellowstone County Sheriff s Office MT 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Chippewa Cree Tribe MT 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** ** Chippewa Cree Tribe MT 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Cheshire County DOC NH 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Cheshire County DOC NH 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Grafton County DOC NH 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Strafford County DOC NH 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Sullivan County DOC NH 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Belknap County DOC NH 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Cheshire County DOC NH 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Grafton County DOC NH 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Sullivan County DOC NH 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Cumberland County Department of Cumberland County Department of New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene NJ 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes NJ 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes NY 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes NY 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Astabula County Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Astabula County Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Butler County Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** Butler County Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Jefferson County Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Jefferson County Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Sandusky County Board of Commissioners FY12 Sandusky County Board of Commissioners FY12 OH 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** OH 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Adapt, Inc. OR 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Adapt, Inc. OR 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Hidalgo County TX 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Travis County TX 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Travis County TX 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes West Texas CSCD TX 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 60 0 ** Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%) Page 17

19 Organization State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period West Texas CSCD TX 2010-RT-BX-0026 $202, April June 2013 Yes Midland Judicial District CSCD TX 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Midland Judicial District CSCD TX 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Dallas County TX 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Dallas County TX 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Harris County CSCD TX 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Harris County CSCD TX 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Utah County Department of Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Treatment Utah County Department of Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Treatment UT 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes UT 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Chesterfield County VA 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Chesterfield County VA 2009-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Hampton City Sheriff s Office VA 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Hampton City Sheriff s Office VA 2009-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Department of VT 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Department of VT 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Skagit County WA 2012-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Skagit County WA 2012-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Delaware County Community Delaware County Community Delaware County Community Delaware County Community Delaware County Community IN 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes IN 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes IN 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes IN 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes IN 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Lawrence County Superior Court IN 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Lawrence County Superior Court IN 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** Morrison County MN 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Morrison County MN 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** ** ** ** ** ** ** * Duplicate date entry. ** Division error (can t divide by zero)/grantee reported zero. Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Released to Community (%) Page 18

20 Appendix C. Data from Aftercare Program Grantees and Subrecipients: January June 2013 This table presents the key measures for individual grantees and subrecipients. Organization State Federal Award Number Award Amount ($) Reporting Period Chicanos Por La Causa AZ 2012-RT-BX-0049 $ 10, January March 2013 Yes Tulare County, Sheriff's Department CA 2009-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** California Youth Outreach CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** ** 26 California Youth Outreach CA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** ** 80 Fresno County EOC CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Fresno County EOC CA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 23 0 ** Homeboy Industries CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Homeboy Industries CA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes LA CAUSA CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes 5 0 ** ** LA CAUSA CA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes 5 0 ** ** 67 0 Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Paving the Way Foundation CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes San Jose Conservation Corps CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes San Jose Conservation Corps CA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes WestCare California CA 2010-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes WestCare California CA 2010-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Alameda County, Probation Department Alameda County, Probation Department Kern County, Mental Health Department Kern County, Mental Health Department Riverside County, Dept. of Mental Health CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** ** 100 CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** 100 San Benito County, Behavioral Health CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes San Benito County, Behavioral Health CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes San Luis Obispo County, Health Agency San Luis Obispo County, Health Agency Santa Cruz County, Probation Department Santa Cruz County, Probation Department Stanislaus County, Behavioral Health & Recovery Services Stanislaus County, Behavioral Health & Recovery Services CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes ** 100 CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes ** 71 CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Yolo County, Probation Department CA 2011-RT-BX , January March 2013 Yes Yolo County, Probation Department CA 2011-RT-BX , April June 2013 Yes Subrecipient Total Enrolled (N) New Admission (N) High-Risk Participants (%) Participants Testing Positive (%) Successful Completion (%) Case Plan (%) Page 19