Recommendations
Most respondents of TCJC’s online survey view rehabilitation as the primary purpose of TDCJ. The vast majority also feels that non-violent drug offenders would best be benefited by programs outside of prison walls rather than by prison, and they agree that additional funding should be directed towards such rehabilitation and probation programs.
Based on these findings, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition makes the following major recommendations to the Sunset Advisory Commission, the Texas Legislature, and organizations that focus their work on issues related to Texas’ incarcerated population:
Assess Evidence-Based Treatment Programs. Given the readiness of Texans to fund alternatives to incarceration, it is necessary to begin a comprehensive search, review, and analysis of proven treatment programs that yield the best results, in coordination with an analysis of how probation differs from drug rehabilitation.
-
Focus on Programs that Reduce Crime.Evidence-based treatment programs are an effective means for reducing crime. According to a study by the state’s Texas Criminal Justice Policy Council, offenders who receive appropriate treatment are four times less likely to return to prison than those who do not. Moreover, a study by the United States Department of Justice’s National Corrections Institute found that “tough on crime” penalties actually result in a slight increase in an individual’s inclination toward criminal activity. On the other hand, treatment and programs, such as cognitive skills training, result in a 15–29% decrease in an individual’s criminal behavior.
-
View Probation and Drug Treatment Separately. Oftentimes, an individual’s addiction to drugs causes their criminal activity (such as theft), as they require funds to feed their addiction. This individual’s problems can be addressed in two ways: (1) through drug treatment, or (2) through probation. Drug treatment will best get to the root of the criminal activity because it will address the physiological impact of the substance on the addict and help in putting an end to the need for criminal activity spurred by the addiction. Probation will help determine if the drug treatment program is truly working for that individual. For instance, if an offender on probation produces a urine analysis that tests positive for a particular drug, his/her probation officer will be able to verify that the offender’s particular treatment program is not working. This should not be a cause for probation revocation (as committing another crime, like theft, would be). Not all treatment programs work for every type of addiction, and on average, an addict relapses three times before proper treatment. If an individual is punished with probation revocation for failure to stop his/her illness, s/he will ultimately reenter society with the continuing need to make poor and illegal life decisions. Judges should be given tools besides revocations to deal with probationers poor decisions that fall short of new crimes, and instead reserve prison space for those who are a real threat to public safety.
-
Invest in Programs that will Yield Real Returns. Texas’ community supervision resources are stretched to the limit. The stress created by overburdening probation officers with non-violent offenders can ultimately allow higher risk probationers to slip through the cracks. This is something that we cannot afford – from both a financial and a public safety perspective. Texas should change this ongoing practice by investing in programs (such as drug treatment programs, as mentioned above) that could pull as many as half of our probationers out of the criminal justice system and put them on the road to becoming productive citizen.