1. The TJC Model for Building a
Jail-to-Community
Transition System
Partnering for Jail Re-Entry Services Seminar
Orlando, Florida
June 13, 2013
The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
THE URBAN INSTITUTE
Justice Policy Center

2. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Presentation Plan
• TJC Initiative Overview
• Principles of Effective Intervention
• TJC Model Elements and Implementation
– Client Level
– System Level
• Resources Available to You
• Questions

3. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Why TJC Is Needed
• Jails see huge numbers of individuals
– 13 million annual admissions
– High levels of need (substance abuse, mental illness,
homelessness)
• Reentry knowledge base is very prison-focused
• Jails face unique challenges managing reentry
– High turnover
– Disparate population
– High demand on limited resources

4. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
TJC Overview
Initiated by NIC cooperative agreement with Urban Institute
in 2007 to:
• Develop a TJC model to assist with implementing
effective transition strategies
• Select and provide implementation assistance to TJC
learning sites
• Phase 1 Sites: 2008-2012
• Phase 2 Sites: 2012-2015
• Conduct process and systems-change evaluation of TJC
• Disseminate TJC knowledge to inform practice
nationwide
• Web-based TJC Online Learning Toolkit launched April 2010

5. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
TJC Learning Sites
Phase 1
Sites
Largest
City
County
Pop.
Jail
ADP
Phase 2
Sites
Largest
City
County
Pop.
Jail
ADP
Davidson
County, TN
Nashville 626,144 2,604 Ada County,
ID
Boise 400,842 829
Denver
County, CO
Denver 598,707 2,009 Franklin
County, MA
Greenfield 71,778 129
Douglas
County, KS
Lawrence 114,748 155 Fresno
County, CA
Fresno 942,904 1,923
Kent
County, MI
Grand
Rapids
605,213 1,254 Hennepin
County, MN
Minneapolis 1,168,431 1,112
La Crosse
County, WI
La Crosse 112,627 187 Howard
County, MD
Columbia 293,142 319
Orange
County, CA
Santa Ana 3,010,759 6,545 Duval
County, FL
Jacksonville 870,709 2,929
AB 109 Site Largest
City
County
Pop.
Jail
ADP
AB 109 Site Largest
City
County
Pop.
Jail
ADP
San Diego
County, CA
San Diego 3,140,069 4,630 Santa
Barbara
County, CA
Santa
Maria
426,878 899

6. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
System Elements
Individual Intervention
Elements
- -
Targeted
intervention
strategies
Data-driven
understanding
of local reentry
Collaborative
structure and
joint ownership
Leadership, vision,
and organizational
culture
Self-evaluation
and
sustainability
+ ++ +
Screening &
Assessment
Targeted Interventions
COMMUNITYJAIL
Transition Plan
Formal servicesInformation & referrals Informal support systemsCase management Supervision
TJC Model

7. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Principles of Effective Correctional
Intervention
1. Assess Actuarial Risk/Needs
2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation
3. Target Interventions
a) Risk Principle: Prioritize supervision and treatment resources for higher risk offenders
b) Need Principle: Target interventions to criminogenic (correlated to crime) needs.
c) Responsivity Principle: Be responsive to temperament, learning style, motivation, culture,
and gender when assigning programs
d) Dosage: Structure 40-70% of high-risk offenders’ time for three to nine months.
e) Treatment Principle: Integrate treatment into the full sentence/ sanction requirements.
4. Skill Train With Directed Practice (e.g., use cognitive behavioral
treatment methods)
5. Increase Positive Reinforcement
6. Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities
7. Measure Relevant Processes/Practices
8. Provide Measurement Feedback Source: Crime and Justice
Institute and National
Institute of Corrections

8. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Common Language on Concepts
• Risk
– Likelihood of recidivism in the community
– Can be gauged primarily using static factors (those
that do not change)
– Tells a system who to target for intervention
• Criminogenic Need
– Dynamic factors (changeable) related to likelihood of
reoffending
– Tells a system what issues to address in a target
population

9. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Program Effectiveness for High-Risk Offenders
Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2004 (N=13,221)

10. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2004
(N=13,221)
Program Effectiveness for Low-Risk Offenders

11. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
What Are Criminogenic Needs?
Criminogenic Need
Factor
Risk
History of antisocial behavior Early and continuing involvement in a number and variety of
antisocial acts and a variety of settings
Antisocial personality pattern Adventurous pleasure seeking, weak self-control, restlessly
aggressive
Antisocial cognition Attitudes, values, beliefs, and rationalizations supportive of crime;
cognitive emotional states of anger, resentment, and defiance
Antisocial associates Close association with criminal others and relative isolation from
anticriminal others; immediate social support for crime
Family and/or marital Two key elements are nurturance and/or caring and monitoring
and/or supervision
School and/or work Low levels of performance and satisfaction in school and/or work
Leisure and/or recreation Low levels of involvement and satisfaction in anticriminal leisure
pursuits
Substance abuse Abuse of alcohol and/or other drugs
Adapted from Andrews, Bonta and Wormith (2006), The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need
Assessment.

12. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
First Four Are the “Big Four”
Criminogenic Need
Factor
Risk
History of antisocial
behavior
Early and continuing involvement in a number and variety of
antisocial acts and a variety of settings
Antisocial personality
pattern
Adventurous pleasure seeking, weak self-control, restlessly
aggressive
Antisocial cognition Attitudes, values, beliefs, and rationalizations supportive of
crime; cognitive emotional states of anger, resentment, and
defiance
Antisocial associates Close association with criminal others and relative isolation
from anticriminal others; immediate social support for crime
Family and/or marital Two key elements are nurturance and/or caring and monitoring
and/or supervision
School and/or work Low levels of performance and satisfaction in school and/or work
Leisure and/or recreation Low levels of involvement and satisfaction in anticriminal leisure
pursuits
Substance abuse Abuse of alcohol and/or other drugs
Adapted from Andrews, Bonta and Wormith (2006), The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need
Assessment.

13. Low Risk
Screening
High Risk
Med. Risk
Resource information
upon release
Assessment
High Risk
Med. Risk
TransitionPlanning
Post-ReleaseInterventions
Jail-Based
Interventions
Longer LOS
Shorter LOS
Intervention Filter

14. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Tools for Gauging Risk and Need
• Screening (e.g. Proxy, LSI-SV)
– Quick and minimal resource
– Risk only
– Flags those needing more attention
• General Assessment (e.g. LSI-R, COMPAS, Wisconsin)
– More comprehensive (and resource intensive: 45-60 minutes to
administer)
– Identify risk and criminogenic needs
– Basis for transition plans
• Specialized Assessment (e.g. STATIC-99, URICA,
ASUS)
– Covers specific areas (ex. addiction, motivation to change) in
greater detail; or
– Covers specific populations (ex. sex offenders) whose risk/need
profile differs from general population

15. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
R-N-R Principles Work as a Package
Source: Andrews and Bonta (2007), Risk-Need-Responsivity Model for Offender Assessment and Rehabilitation

16. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Characteristics of Systems
Approaches
• Span agency boundaries
• Provide overarching framework
– Organize complexity
• Involve collaborative planning and oversight
• Process is emphasized
• Outcome-oriented
• Data-driven

17. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Impediments to Systems Approaches
• Difficult to reconcile missions, incentives, cultures of
participating agencies
• Systems change approaches often move slowly
– And sometimes should move more slowly still
• Skepticism regarding risk and need-based decision-
making
• Data limitations
– Doesn’t exist
– Limited analytical capacity
– Inability to look across data systems

18. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
System Elements
• Convening authority
• Oversight and guidance
• Pushing a systems culture
Leadership, vision,
and organizational
culture

19. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Phase 1 Site Leadership Engagement
Site Roles of Formal Leadership
Davidson County • Spearheaded by sheriff
• Overseen by Community Justice Executive Council
chaired by mayor
Denver • Overseen by Crime Prevention and Control
Commission established by mayor
Douglas County • Created Executive Council including sheriff and
county commissioner
Kent County • Community Corrections Advisory Board oversees
La Crosse County • County supervisor on core implementation team
• TJC on Criminal Justice Management Committee
agenda
Orange County (CA) • Collaboration between sheriff and probation

20. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
System Elements
• Engage all partners in the issue
• Inspire and motivate them to contribute
• Organize their participation
• Clarify roles and responsibilities
Collaborative
structure and
joint ownership
Leadership, vision,
and organizational
culture
+

21. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Community Corrections Advisory Board
(Executive-level Team)*
Screening & Assessment Work Group
• Brad VanZanten – Chair, 11/2009
• Randy Demory, KCSD – co-Chair
• Kristen Geitzen, Arbor Circle
• Jon McKay, jail MH supervisor /FOC
• Shannon Myers, MI DOC (parole)
• Andy Verheek, OCC
• Peggy Vickery, KCSD reentry center
• Gary Christensen, Corrections Partners
(NTJC)
Community Reentry Coordinating Council**
(Implementation Body for TJC)
National TJC Team – NIC, UI
Kent County TJC Initiative Structure
Data & Evaluation Work Group
• Andy Verheek, OCC – Chair ??
• Dave Anderson, KCSD (CRC)
• Randy Demory, KCSD
• Jack Greenfield, Arbor Circle
• Others? – TBD 12/2009 or 1/2010
• Janeen Buck Willison, UI (NTJC)
* Circa 1989; the CCAB distributes and administers community corrections grant funding, forum for all local criminal justice planning. Members represent the judiciary,
county commission, prosecution, defense bar, local law enforcement, Sheriff, business community and community-based organizations.
** Established June 2008; meets monthly. The CRCC focuses exclusively on reentry and its related issues, and membership mirrors the CCAB but different individuals staff
the CRCC.
Program & Curricula Work Group
• Tina Worrall, CRC – Chair
• Barb DeVos, OCC – co-Chair
• Ross Buitendorp, Network 180
• Bill Bruursema, FMM
• Kristen Geitzen, Arbor Circle
• Candice Petrovich, FOC
• Rob Steele, KCSD
• Brad VanZanten. 59th District
(probation)
• Kevin Warwick, ASA (NTJC)
12/15/09 revised (v3)
Kent TJC Core Team
• Randy Demory, KCSD
• Tina Worrall, TJC Coordinator
• Andy Verheek, OCC
• Barb DeVos, OCC
• Jack Greenfield, Arbor Circle
• Dave Anderson, KCSD (CRC)

22. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
System Elements
• Discovery: Finding out the key things about your jail
population that you don’t know
• Clarification: Articulating who is in the jail and what is
known about them to orient all partners
Data-driven
understanding
of local reentry
Collaborative
structure and
joint ownership
Leadership, vision,
and organizational
culture
++

23. Bookings
N=219
Average Daily Population (ADP)
N=326
Pretrial
N=108
(49% of bookings)
30% released within 48 hrs.
8% released within 48-72 hrs.
Pretrial Length of Stay
0-90 days: 74%
90+ days: 26%
Pretrial Release Type
49% Bond
20% Court Ordered Release
15% Detainer
6% DOC
3% Sentence Served
3% Waived Extradition
3% Released on Recognizance
Sentenced
N=39
(18% of bookings)
Length of Stay
Federal detainees
(ICE & USM)
N= 42
(19% of bookings)
Weekend Sentenced
N=30
(14% of bookings)
36% Released on Bond
24% Released as Sentence Served
16% Court-Ordered Release
12% Released on Detainer
5% Released to State DOC
2% Waived Extradition
2% Released on Personal Recognizance
(ROR)
2% Released to ICE
1% Other (includes Parole and Released as
Sentence Suspended)
Release Type (Pretrial and Sentenced)
(not including federal detainees & weekenders)
HCDC 2011
Monthly Snapshot

25. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
System Elements
• Formalize
• Written policies and procedures
• Stakeholder education material
• Monitor quality
• Measure process and outcomes
Targeted
intervention
strategies
Data-driven
understanding
of local reentry
Collaborative
structure and
joint ownership
Leadership, vision,
and organizational
culture
Self-evaluation
and
sustainability
+ ++ +

26. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Institutional
Phase
Structured Reentry
Phase
Transition to
Community /
Reintegration Phase
Initial
Screening
(Proxy)
Treatment
in Jail
Great Escape
(in-custody)
G.E.D
Substance
Abuse
Probation
Outreach-Resource-Follow-up
Resource
Center
Great Escape (post-
custody placement)
Probation
Thinking for a
Change
B.O.T. (post-custody
placement)
Community
Outreach (OCREP)
In Jail
Meeting
with
Community
Meeting
with
Programs
Re-Entry
Team
Housing
Family
Job
Victim
Community
Outreach
Orange County, CA Re-Entry Model
Thinking for
a Change
B.O.T.
workshops
DRC
Day Reporting Center
Wisconsin
Risk/Needs
Assessment
(high risk)

27. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
TJC Can Start from Different Points
• Nascent: Little or no jail reentry activity exists
– Priority: Identify a starting point
• Fragmented: Jail and community reentry activity in
place, but little coordination or communication
– Priority: Establish collaboration and fill gaps
• Unbalanced: Reentry work in either jail or community
much more advanced than the other
– Priority: Build up other side and ensure coordinated approach
• Mature: Reentry system in place
– Priority: Focus on maintenance and continuous improvement
• Uncertain: Not sure what’s in place
– Priority: Fact-finding and information-gathering

28. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Hub and Spoke Model: Denver
Jail Life Skills Release
Community
Reentry
Project

29. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Network Model: Davidson County
Davidson County
Sheriff’s Office

30. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
Boundary-Spanning Partner Model:
La Crosse
Justice Sanctions
Jail-Based Programming
• Assessment
• Case Planning
Release
• Direct Service
• Supervision

31. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
TJC and Related Resources
• TJC Project website: www.jailtransition.com
– Phase 1 Process and Systems Change Evaluation
Report
– Practitioner briefs
• Screening and Assessment
• Case Management
• TJC Online Learning Toolkit:
www.jailtransition.com/toolkit
• The Elected Official’s Toolkit for Jail Reentry
• Partnering with Jails to Improve Reentry: A
Guidebook for Community-Based Organizations

32. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
TJC Online Learning Toolkit
• Web-based learning resource on TJC
model implementation
• Makes core TJC tools and examples
available to practitioners
• Can be updated to reflect emerging
lessons and practices

33. Toolkit Screen Shot

34. The
Transition from Jail to Community
Initiative
For More Information
Jesse Jannetta, TJC Project Director
jjannetta@urban.org
202-261-5593