TREATMENT AND REENTRY PRACTICES
FOR SEX OFFENDERS
An Overview of States

Reagan Daly
Vera Institute of Justice
September 2008

Suggested citation: Reagan Daly. Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders: An Overview of States.
New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2008.

This report was prepared by the Vera Institute of Justice under grant 2006-MU-BX-K018 awarded by the Bureau of
Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also
includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Opinions expressed in this document are those of the
author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice or the Vera
Institute of Justice. © 2008 Vera Institute of Justice. All rights reserved.
Additional copies can be obtained from the communications department of the Vera Institute of Justice, 233
Broadway, 12th floor, New York, New York, 10279,
(212) 334-1300. An electronic version of this report is available for download on Vera’s web site, www.vera.org.
Requests for additional information about the research described in this report should be directed to
contactvera@vera.org.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice ii

Executive Summary

the ACUTE, are becoming more prevalent in
community supervision.

Over the past 15 years, the response of the criminal justice

•

No reentry initiatives were found that

system to people who have been convicted of a sex offense

specifically target sex offenders. Although

has become increasingly punitive, relying heavily on

eligible for general reentry programming in

incarceration. Yet, a consequent increase in criminal

most states, people convicted of a sexual

justice costs has led some states to reconsider their

offense have few, if any, options for reentry

response to sex offenders. Concerns about public safety

programming that addresses their unique needs.

and the protection of victims remain the primary focus, but

•

Correctional institutions and community

many states have also invested in treatment and reentry

supervision agencies in most states share

programs as alternatives to incarceration for some people.

information about the case histories and
treatment plans of sex offenders who are

Although the content and structure of treatment and
reentry programs vary considerably from one jurisdiction

returning to the community from prison.

to another, few if any resources provide criminal justice

Research suggests that this type of inter-agency

officials and policymakers an overview of these programs

communication can help reduce recidivism.

or a comparative assessment of their effectiveness. This

•

In general, community supervision agencies

report attempts to address these issues by providing an

manage risk and provide services. Research

overview and analysis of existing treatment and reentry

suggests that this is an effective approach to

practices for sex offenders who are involved with the

reducing recidivism.

criminal justice system. It focuses, specifically, on four

•

A limited number of states are conducting

broad areas of practice: treatment in prison, treatment

research on their own treatment, reentry, and

under community supervision, reentry programming, and

supervision initiatives. Almost no studies have

community supervision. Interviews with state officials and

examined these programs from a cost-benefit

treatment providers from 37 states that responded to our

perspective.

survey revealed several findings:
•

In both prison and community settings, the
treatment of sex offenders is generally
grounded in evidence-based practices,
especially cognitive-behavioral therapy. In
general, treatment is much more available in the
community than in institutional settings.

•

In most of the participating states, communitybased treatment for sex offenders is supported,
at least in part, by collecting fees from those in
treatment—a circumstance that may limit
access to these programs.

•

Standardized risk assessment tools such as the
STATIC-99 are now widely used nationally in
both prison- and community-based treatment
programs. Needs assessment tools, especially

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice iii

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the following people for their
assistance in conducting this study: Robin Campbell,
Ashley Cannon, Tina Chiu, Jennifer Fratello, Jordie
Hannum, Alisa Klein, Abbi Leman, Scott Matson,
Charles Onley, Ruth Parlin, Maggie Peck, Carla Roa,
Christine Scott-Hayward, Neil Weiner, Dan Wilhelm,
and finally, all interview respondents.
Edited by Patrick Kelly.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice iv

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgments......................................................................................................... iv
Introduction and Background.......................................................................................... 1
Methodology ................................................................................................................. 2
Research on Treatment, Reentry, and Community Supervision Practices ............................ 3
Prison- and Community-Based Treatment ................................................................ 3
Reentry Programming ............................................................................................ 6
Community Supervision .......................................................................................... 7
Recent Trends in Treatment, Reentry, and Community Supervision Practices...................... 8
Prison-Based Treatment ......................................................................................... 8
Community-Based Treatment................................................................................ 11
Reentry Programming .......................................................................................... 12
Community Supervision ........................................................................................ 13
Conclusions................................................................................................................. 15
Bibliography ................................................................................................................ 16
Appendix A: State Overview Tables of Prison-Based Treatment ....................................... 18
Appendix B: State Overview Tables of Community-Based Treatment................................ 23
Appendix C: State Overview Tables of Reentry Programming .......................................... 26
Appendix D: State Overview Tables of Community Supervision Practices .......................... 28
Appendix E: Individual State Templates......................................................................... 30

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice v

Introduction and Background

release information to the public about known convicted
sex offenders, and has continued through the passage of

The sentencing and management of sex offenders is one

Jessica’s Law in 2006, which introduced stricter

of the most difficult and controversial issues facing the

penalties and restrictions for sex offenders.) Today, the

criminal justice system today. This is in large part due to

term sex offense can include everything from child

the brutal nature of many sex crimes and the fact that

molestation to public urination.
The increasing reliance on incarceration as a

many victims are children and other vulnerable people—
a combination that elicits highly emotional responses

response to sex offenses, together with expanded

from the public.

definitions of what constitutes a sex offense, has driven

Over the past 15 years, the criminal justice system’s

up criminal justice costs. This has led some states to

response to people who have been convicted of a sex

reconsider their response to sex offenders. While

offense has become increasingly punitive. In 2004, more

concerns of public safety and the protection of victims

than 150,000 people were incarcerated in state prisons

remain the primary focus, a number of states—especially

for sex offenses, compared with 142,000 in 2002 and

those with limited resources—have concluded that

1

110,000 in 1999. In many states, lengthy prison

incarceration is simply not a viable long-term solution, at

sentences are now the norm: according to one recent

least not for all sex offenders.

study, people who are incarcerated in connection with a

In fact, most people who are convicted of a sex

sex offense spend about twice as long in prison as those

offense will be placed under community supervision at

2

who serve time for other crimes. Also, an increasing

some point—either on probation immediately following

number of local and state laws impose strict registration

sentencing or on parole after having served a jail or

and residency requirements on people who have been

prison term. A 1997 study by the Bureau of Justice

convicted of a sex offense, even after they have served a

Statistics reports that of the approximately 234,000 adult

prison sentence. There are now more than 636,000

sex offenders who are under the custody or control of

registered sex offenders in the United States—one in 500

correctional agencies on any given day in the United

3

Americans. This number has doubled in the last
4

decade.

The punitive response of the past 15 years is not
limited to sentencing laws and stricter registration

States, almost 60 percent are under some form of
community supervision.5 Although there has been no
follow-up study in recent years, this number has likely
grown.

requirements: the definition of what constitutes a sex

To cope with the large number of sex offenders under

offense has also been greatly expanded. (The beginning

community supervision, a growing number of states are

of this expansion coincided with the 1993 passage of

investing in treatment programs. Increasingly, these

Megan’s Law, a federal regulation that directed states to

programs are also functioning as alternatives to
incarceration.
However, the content and structure of treatment and

1

W.J. Sabol, H. Couture, and P.M. Harrison, Prisoners in 2006
(Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006); P. M. Harrison
and A. J. Beck, Prisoners in 2004 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice
Statistics, 2004); A. J. Beck and P. M. Harrison, Prisoners in 2000
(Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000).
2
Lawrence A. Greenfield, Sex Offenses and Offenders: An Analysis of
Data on Rape and Sexual Assault (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice
Statistics, 1997, NCJ 163392).
3
National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, Registered Sex
Offenders in the United States per 100,000 Population (map), March
25, 2008.
4
Devon B. Adams, Summary of State Sex Offender Registries
(Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics (Fact Sheet): March
2002, NCJ 192265).

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

reentry programs vary considerably from one jurisdiction
to another, and there are few resources for criminal justice
officials and policymakers who would like an overview of
these programs nationwide. Both the Center for Sex
Offender Management and the Association for the
Treatment of Sexual Abusers, an international non-profit

5

Ibid.

Vera Institute of Justice 1

organization, have produced publications on the treatment

community supervision. We end with a discussion of

and management of sex offenders, but policymakers

overarching themes and conclusions.

seeking to optimize their use of resources would profit
from a survey of the programs that are currently in place
across the United States. Similarly, their policy decisions

Methodology

would benefit from a comparative assessment of the
effectiveness of current practices.

Vera researchers relied on qualitative methods to collect

This report attempts to address these issues by

and analyze data for this report. Data was collected over

providing an overview and analysis of existing treatment

a six-month study period through phone interviews with

and reentry practices for sex offenders involved with the

state officials and other policymakers who manage sex

criminal justice system (as opposed to those who are

offenders.

6

civilly committed). Drawing on information that was

For each of the four substantive areas mentioned

collected by Vera researchers from policymakers and

earlier (prison-based treatment, community-based

treatment providers in the 50 states and Washington, DC,

treatment, reentry, and community supervision), Vera

it emphasizes the structure, content, and availability of

researchers developed detailed interview questionnaires

those programs and, when applicable, compares current

and identified at least one potential respondent from each

practices to research findings. Specifically, it focuses on

state (for a minimum total of four contacts per state).

four broad areas of practice: treatment in prison,

Most respondents either worked in the Department of

treatment under community supervision, reentry

Corrections or another state agency or were treatment

7

programming, and community supervision.

providers. Interview questions were open ended.
The overall response rate for all four substantive

Note that this report does not provide an exhaustive
catalog of what each state is doing in terms of treatment,

areas categories across all 51 jurisdictions was 65

reentry, and community supervision, nor does it provide

percent.9 For each state, Vera researchers entered

a comprehensive overview of the legal context in which

information into an answer template that covered all four

8

these services are being delivered. Rather, it aims to

substantive areas. Once this answer template was

identify and analyze nationwide trends in treatment and

completed, it was sent back to the respondents to

reentry practices.

confirm that it was consistent with the information they

After a brief description of our methodology, we

had provided. The completed state templates are

begin with a review of the latest research on treatment,

included as appendices in this report. They provide

reentry, and community supervision practices for sex

detailed information on both the treatment and reentry

offenders. Then, we present and analyze our findings

practices themselves as well as the context in which they

from each of the four broad areas of practice, beginning

were developed.
To identify larger patterns, Vera researchers

with prison-based treatment and followed by
community-based treatment, reentry programming, and

conducted a qualitative data analysis. This qualitative
analysis consisted in reviewing each state template and

6

Civil commitment is the court-ordered confinement and treatment of
sex offenders who are deemed to represent a significant threat to
public safety.
7
Sex offenders in the community also receive treatment under civil
commitment. However, this study focuses exclusively on treatment in
the criminal justice context.
8
To gain a better understanding of state legislation governing sex
offender definitions, registration requirements, and sentencing
practices, the Vera Institute has also issued a companion report, The
Pursuit of Safety: Sex Offender Policy in the United States, that gives
a national overview of these issues.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

categorizing treatment and reentry practices according to
topics of general interest, such as whether statewide
standards exist or the number of treatment providers in a
given state. These state overviews are also included in
9

In social science research, a response rate above 50 percent is
considered adequate for analysis and publishing (see Babbie 2005 for
more information).

Vera Institute of Justice 2

the appendices. Categorizing treatment and reentry

makes it difficult to assess the financial impact of these

practices in this manner provided researchers with a

programs.

broad overview of the subjects.

There are, however, a number of methodological

This study has two methodological limitations. First,

issues associated with research on sex offenders that

as is true of any study that relies on interview responses,

limit the applicability of these findings. For one, it is

some of those we contacted chose not to participate, with

often difficult to find a control group with which to

the result that there are gaps in our data. Our discussion

compare program participants—a necessary step if one is

of national trends and patterns here reflects only those

to know for certain a program’s effect. Also, low

states that responded to requests for phone interviews.

baseline rates of sexual offense arrests and significant

Second, the trends identified in this report are based on

under-reporting of sexual offenses make it difficult for

information reported by state contacts. While Vera

researchers to demonstrate statistically significant

researchers made every effort to ensure that the

reductions in sexual offending as a result of treatment

information is accurate, this is a complex subject, and the

and reentry programs.10

open-ended nature of our interview questions left room
for interpretation and (possibly) error.

In the remainder of this section, we discuss in more
detail research as it relates to each of the four broad areas
of practice identified earlier: treatment in prison,

Research on Treatment, Reentry,
and Community Supervision
Practices

community-based treatment, reentry programming, and
community supervision.
PRISON- AND COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT

Treatment programs generally have three aims: First, they
In this section, we present an overview of recent research

aim to help offenders take responsibility for their actions.

on treatment (both in prison and in the community),

Second, they aim to prevent relapse. Third, they aim to

reentry, and community supervision practices for sex

rehabilitate people who have been convicted of a sex

offenders. The aim is to provide a context for the

offense.11 Different programs pursue these goals in a

assessment of current state practices described in

variety of ways, ranging from CBT to chemical castration

subsequent sections of this report.

(the use of a hormonal medication such as Depo-Provera to

Broadly, the research on treatment methods has

temporarily reduce testosterone levels) to education. The

consistently found that cognitive-behavioral therapy

appropriateness of any particular approach often depends

(CBT), a treatment that relies on changing thought

on the nature of a person’s offending behavior: a treatment

processes to help people understand and accept

that is geared toward pedophiles, for example, may not be

responsibility for their offenses, is the most effective

appropriate for an adult rapist who exhibits more general

approach to reducing sexual and overall recidivism.

criminal tendencies.

(This result applies to programs that provide CBT in
prison as well as those that provide it in other settings.)

Treatment across settings. A 2002 meta-analysis of 43

In addition, the research on reentry and supervision

studies on the psychological treatment of sex offenders

practices has uncovered two salient findings: social

found that the average rate of sexual recidivism for

support is key to making a successful transition back to

people in treatment (12.3 percent) was statistically

society, and supervision is most effective when
combined with specialized sex offender treatment
services. Unfortunately, there has been little cost-benefit
analysis of treatment and reentry programming, which
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

10
It becomes increasingly difficult to establish statistically significant
differences as the number of outcome events decreases.
11
Kurt Bumby, Understanding Treatment for Adults and Juveniles
Who Have Committed Sex Offenses (Silver Spring, MD: Center for
Sex Offender Management, 2006).

Vera Institute of Justice 3

significantly lower than for those who did not receive
12

differences in risk assessment scores between those who

treatment (16.8 percent). The average rate of overall

completed the program and those who did not, it is

recidivism for those in treatment was also lower (27.9

impossible to know for certain whether factors other than

percent, compared with 39.2 percent for people who

treatment affected the observed outcomes.16

were not in treatment).13 Finally, the analysis found that

In contrast, there are several studies which have

CBT, which has become standard practice in almost

examined specific treatment programs and concluded

every state, is much more effective than the treatments

that they do not have a significant effect on recidivism

that were used before 1980. More recently, a review of

rates.17 Among these is a study in which prisoners who

69 controlled outcome evaluations of sex offender

had volunteered to participate in California’s Sex

treatment confirmed many documented earlier findings.

Offender Treatment and Evaluation Project (SOTEP)

It also found that treatment reduces sexual recidivism by

were randomly assigned to either SOTEP (which

an average of 37 percent and that hormonal therapy and

employed CBT and relapse prevention, a treatment that

CBT work best—although it was difficult to separate the

uses cognitive and behavioral techniques to help

14

effect of these treatments from other factors. The report

offenders identify and change negative behavioral

concluded that more rigorous studies were needed to

patterns) or a control group.18 Likewise, researchers from

determine the effectiveness of different treatments for

the Washington State Institute for Public Policy

different types of offenders.

(WSIPP), which is well-known for both its metaanalyses and its research on treatment for sex offenders,

Prison-based treatment. The research literature on the

found that a sex offender treatment program for inmates

effectiveness of treatment programs for incarcerated

had little effect on recidivism rates for sexual and violent

offenders is fairly inconclusive. A 2003 study of 195 sex

offenses—despite the fact that those who participated in

offenders who took part in a prison-based CBT program

the program did so voluntarily and were thus likely to be

in Vermont found that people who completed the

amenable to treatment.19

program were significantly less likely (5.4 percent) than

In spite of these inconclusive results regarding

those who dropped out (30.6 percent) or refused to

prison-based treatment in general, there is some evidence

participate (30.0 percent) to be charged with a sexual

that CBT in particular is effective for lowering

15

offense in a six-year follow-up period. It also found

recidivism rates. In addition to the Vermont study

that continuing with treatment after release from prison
was significantly associated with lower recidivism of
sexual offenses. However, this study did not use
randomly assigned treatment or control groups, so
despite the fact that researchers found no significant
12

Because meta-analyses incorporate numerous studies that measure
recidivism differently, it is not possible to define recidivism more
specifically.
13
R.K. Hanson, A. Gordon, A.J.R. Harris, J.K. Marques, W. Murphy,
V.L. Quinsey, and M.C. Seto, “First Report of the Collaborative
Outcome Data Project on the Effectiveness of Psychological
Treatment for Sex Offenders,” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research
and Treatment, 14 (2002): 169-194.
14
F. Lösel and M. Schmucker, “The Effectiveness of Treatment for
Sexual Offenders: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis,” Journal of
Experimental Criminology 1(2005): 117-146.
15
R.J. McGrath, G. Cumming, J.A. Livingston, and S. Hoke,
“Outcome of a Treatment Program for Adult Sex Offenders: From
Prison to Community,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18, no 1
(2003): 3-17.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

16
The use of comparison groups allows researchers to assess whether
or not changes in outcomes following treatment would have occurred
in the absence of treatment as well. Random assignment to treatment
or comparison groups provides the strongest evidence of a treatment
effect because it creates two groups that are comparable except for the
treatment intervention.
17
A. Mander, M. Atrops, A. Barnes, and R. Munafo, Sex Offender
Treatment Program: Initial Recidivism Study (Anchorage, AK: Alaska
Department of Corrections, 1996); and V.L.E. Quinsey, G.T. Harris,
M.E. Rice, and C.A. Cormier, Violent Offenders: Appraising and
Managing Risk (Washington, DC: APA, 1998).
18
J.K. Marques, M. Wiederanders, D.M. Day, C. Nelson, and A. Van
Ommeren, “Effects of a Relapse Prevention Program on Sexual
Recidivism: Final Results from California’s Sex Offender Treatment
and Evaluation Project (SOTEP). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of
Research and Treatment 17 (2005): 79-107. Note that because random
assignment fully controls for competing influences on recidivism, the
absence of a significant difference between the two groups in this
study can be interpreted as strong evidence that there was in fact no
difference between them.
19
L. Song, and Roxanne Lieb, Washington State Sex Offenders:
Overview of Recidivism Studies (Olympia, WA: Washington State
Institute for Public Policy, 1995).

Vera Institute of Justice 4

mentioned above, a 2000 study of high-risk sex

$3,258 per participant. In contrast, treatment delivered to

offenders who volunteered for Canada’s Clearwater Sex

juveniles in an institutional setting saved an average of

Offender Treatment Program, which used both CBT and

$7,829 per participant.23 This was the only cost-benefit

a relapse prevention component, found that program

analysis we uncovered in our review.

participants had significantly lower reconviction rates
than those in a comparison group.20 Moreover, the

Community-based treatment. The research on

difference in conviction rates was much larger for sexual

community-based treatment programs for sex offenders

reconvictions than for nonsexual reconvictions.

suggests, fairly consistently, that these programs are

Similarly, in a comprehensive meta-analysis, WSIPP

effective in reducing recidivism. In one study of 1,400

researchers found that prison-based CBT reduced

sex offenders who were sentenced to probation in

21

recidivism by an average of 14.9 percent.

Therapeutic community programs, which emphasize

Minnesota, researchers found that re-arrest rates for
sexual offenses for those who completed treatment (5

group support in facilitating behavior change, have also

percent) were lower than for those who began but did not

been shown to exert a beneficial effect on sex offender

complete treatment (11 percent) and those who never

recidivism. In 2003, the Colorado Division of Criminal

entered treatment (11 percent).24 The Minnesota study

Justice found that sex offenders who participated in their

also found that offenders who completed treatment were

prison-based therapeutic community program were

less likely to be re-arrested for any new offense (13

significantly less likely than sex offenders who did not

percent versus 45 percent for those who began but did

participate in the program to recidivate across a number

not complete treatment, and 42 percent for those who

22

of measures. Moreover, the Colorado study found that
longer periods of treatment in the therapeutic community

never entered treatment).
In addition, there is evidence that treatment designed

led to lower recidivism rates upon release. Again,

to address deviant feelings and behaviors specifically

though, this evaluation did not use randomly assigned

related to sexual offending has an effect on both sexual

treatment and control groups, nor did it match people in

and nonsexual recidivism rates above and beyond the

the two groups on the basis of characteristics that may

effects of general treatment, which addresses more

have influenced their decision to enroll in treatment. As

general mental health and behavioral issues. For

a result, it is not possible to attribute the observed

example, a 1998 study found that probation supervision

outcomes to the program with any certainty.

combined with specialized sex offender treatment, as

With regard to the cost of prison-based treatment

compared with probation supervision combined with

programs, a cost-benefit analysis by the WSIPP found

only general mental health treatment, significantly

that these programs, when combined with aftercare,

reduced overall re-arrests (for both sexual and nonsexual

actually increase costs to taxpayers by an average of

offenses) among a group of sex offenders in rural
Vermont.25 However, neither the Minnesota nor the

20

J. Looman, J. Abracen, and T. Nicholaichuk, “Recidivism among
treated sexual offenders and matched controls,” Journal of
Interpersonal Violence 15, no. 3 (2000): 279-290; Polly Phipps, Kim
Korinek, Steve Aos, and Roxanne Lieb, Research Findings on Adult
Corrections Programs: A Review (Olympia, WA: Washington State
Institute for Public Policy, 1999). Throughout this section,
“significance” means statistical significance.
21
Steve Aos, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake, Evidence-Based
Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction,
Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates (Olympia, WA: Washington
State Institute for Public Policy, 2006).
22
Kerry Lowden, Nicole Hetz, Linda Harrison, Diane Patrick, Kim
English, and Diane Pasini-Hill, Evaluation of Colorado’s Therapeutic
Community for Sex Offenders: A Report of Findings (Office of
Research and Statistics, Division of Criminal Justice, 2003).

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vermont study used random assignment, so it is not
possible to conclude with any certainty that the

23
Aos, Miller, and Drake, Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to
Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and
Crime Rates, 2006.
24
Sex Offender Supervision: 2000 Report to the Legislature (St. Paul,
MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2000).
25
R.J. McGrath, S.E. Hoke, and J.E. Vojtisek, “Cognitive-Behavioral
Treatment of Sex Offenders: A Treatment Comparison and LongTerm Follow-Up Study,” Criminal Justice and Behavior 25 (1998):
203-225.

Vera Institute of Justice 5

reductions in re-arrests were due to treatment rather than

studies that addresses the subject directly began by

other factors.

examining the general literature on successful reentry

With regard to specific treatments, there is

strategies for people convicted of a wide range of

considerable evidence, grounded in methodologically

offenses. Then, arguing that these reentry strategies can

sound research, that community-based CBT is effective

be applied to sex offenders so long as one takes the

in reducing overall recidivism. However, it remains

unique needs of sex offenders into account, it identified

unclear whether community-based CBT is effective in

several key factors in the successful reentry of sex

reducing sexual recidivism. In a systematic meta-

offenders:

analysis of sex offender programming that examined
only those evaluations that used a well-matched
comparison group, WSIPP researchers found that CBT
significantly reduces recidivism (by an average of 31.2
percent across studies) among low-risk sex offenders on
26

probation. The WSIPP study did not, however,
examine the impact of CBT on sexual recidivism.
It is difficult to assess the impact of medical
treatments on sexual offending. This is primarily due to

1. Institutional and community case managers
collaborate to maintain a consistent approach.
2. Manage sex offenders in prison in a way that
prepares them for release.
3. Consider the benefits of discretionary release
policies.
4. Have case managers actively involved in
facilitating the transition.

ethical restrictions that prevent researchers from

5. Recognize victims as important stakeholders.

randomly assigning people to procedures or treatments

6. Develop a community supervision approach for

that are either potentially harmful or invasive.

sex offenders that promotes successful outcomes

Nonetheless, there have been a handful of studies in this

in addition to risk management.29

area. One of these, a study based on a sample of mostly
pedophiles, found that people who volunteered for and

The Center for Sex Offender Management endorsed

were surgically castrated were significantly less likely to

these strategies in a 2007 report.

engage in recidivism of sexual offenses than volunteers
27

A handful of studies have examined the impact of

who were not castrated. In addition, a meta-analysis

specific reentry models on sex offenders leaving prison.

found that hormonal therapy was, on average, more

A 2005 study, for example, examined Circles of Support

effective in reducing sexual recidivism than psychosocial

and Accountability (COSA), a program that originated in

interventions—although other aspects of these programs

Canada and is becoming more prevalent in the United

28

may account for this effect.

States. COSA encourages high-risk offenders to develop
support networks in the community, consisting mostly of

REENTRY PROGRAMMING

volunteers from faith-based organizations who visit them

Reentry programming aims to help sex offenders make

on a regular basis, following their release from prison.

the transition back into the community after they are

The researchers found that sex offenders who

released from prison. Although reentry in general is a

participated in COSA recidivated at a rate that was 31.6

major topic in the field of corrections, there has been

percent lower than people in a matched group who did

relatively little research that focuses on the specific

not participate.30 Another study of COSA, this one from

needs of sex offenders leaving prison. One of the few
26

Steve Aos, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake, Evidence-Based
Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not
(Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006).
27
Ibid.
28
Lösel and Schmucker, 2005.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

29
K.M. Bumby, T.B. Talbot, and M.M. Carter, “Sex Offender
Reentry: Facilitating Public Safety through Successful Transition and
Community Reintegration,” Criminal Justice and Behavior (in press).
30
R.J. Wilson and J.E. Picheca, “Circles of Support and
Accountability: Engaging the Community in Sexual Offender
Management” in B.K. Schwartz (Ed.), The Sex Offender: Issues in
Assessment, Treatment, and Supervision of Adult and Juvenile

Vera Institute of Justice 6

2007, concluded that the program led to a 70 percent

ensure victim safety, and make reparation to

reduction in re-arrests for sexual offenses and a 57

victims.
31

percent reduction in re-arrests for violent offenses.

2. Sex offender management should rely on interagency coordination, interdisciplinary

Finally, a number of studies suggest that many sex
offenders leaving prison need community support to find

partnership, and job specialization to provide a

a place to live, as strict residency requirements often

unified approach.

32

3. Offenders should be held accountable through

make it difficult for them to find affordable housing.

individualized case management plans that use
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

informal controls (which are learned and

Community supervision refers to those forms of

reinforced through treatment) as well as external

correctional supervision that do not involve

controls (in particular the active involvement of

incarceration, such as probation, parole, and community

family and law enforcement). Polygraphs should

corrections. (Community corrections involves

also be used to monitor these internal and

monitoring offenders independently of probation and

external controls.
4. State and local criminal justice agencies and

parole. In general, community corrections agencies
supervise offenders who have been diverted from prison

policymakers should work together to develop

but who represent a higher risk than people on

informed public policies.
5. Criminal justice agencies should develop quality

probation.) The research on community supervision is
similar to that on reentry in that it stresses the

control mechanisms to monitor the

importance of social bonds and community support in

implementation of these strategies and to assess

reducing recidivism and rehabilitating offenders.

their effectiveness over time.

One of the most promising models of community
supervision—and perhaps the most widely known in the

Each of these principles is grounded in the clinical

sex offender management community—is the

treatment literature, and research on the containment

containment model, an evidence-based model developed

model provides support for its effectiveness in reducing

by the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice in the

recidivism. Some of this research overlaps with the

1980s. The containment model is grounded in five key

treatment literature discussed earlier—for example, the

principles, all of which support the notion that sexual re-

Colorado therapeutic community program that was

offending can be minimized through internal and

found to reduce recidivism was grounded in the

33

external controls:

containment approach. In addition, a 2001 Oregon study
found that people on probation and parole who took part

1. The primary objectives of sex offender
management are to enhance public safety,

in a program that combined treatment, polygraph
monitoring, and specialized supervision were 40 percent
less likely to be convicted of a new felony than people
on probation and parole in a neighboring county who did

Populations (pp 13.1-13.21) (Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute,
2005).
31
R.J. Wilson, J.E. Picheca, and M. Prinzo, “Evaluating the
Effectiveness of Professionally Facilitated Volunteerism in the
Community-Based Management of High-Risk Sexual Offenders: Part
Two—A Comparison of Recidivism Rates, The Howard Journal, 46,
no. 4 (2007): 327-337.
32
Joan Petersilia, When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner
Reentry (New York, NY: New York Open Society Institute, 2003).
33
K. English, S. Pullen, and L. Jones, Managing Adult Sex Offenders
in the Community: A Containment Approach (Washington, DC:
National Institute of Justice, Research in Brief, 1997).

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

not receive the same combination of services.34 Other
state-specific analyses have found that sex offenders who
are supervised under the containment model have low

34

K.A. England, S. Olsen, T. Zakrajsek, P. Murray, and R. Ireson,
“Cognitive/Behavioral Treatment for Sexual Offenders: An
Examination of Recidivism,” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Treatment
and Practice 13, no. 4 (2001): 223-231.

Vera Institute of Justice 7

felony re-arrest rates (6 percent in one study). However,

differences between the two groups with respect to the

none of these state-specific studies used comparison

number of people charged with sexual offenses; the

groups, so it is difficult to attribute this outcome with

number of people charged with sexual or violent

35

any certainty to the containment model.

offenses; or the number of people charged with criminal
offenses in general.39

Other research suggests that strong social support
can play a crucial role in preventing recidivism. For
example, a 2004 study of sex offenders sentenced to
probation for child molestation found that people who
had strong support from family and friends were less
likely to have their probation status revoked for either a

Recent Trends in Treatment,
Reentry, and Community
Supervision Practices

technical violation or a new arrest and that people with
strong support whose status was revoked generally lasted
36

This section summarizes recent trends in each of the four

longer on probation than people without such support.

substantive areas outlined earlier—prison-based

The study also found that people who were employed

treatment, community-based treatment, reentry, and

37

were less likely to violate the terms of probation. These

community supervision—as revealed by our survey.

findings are consistent with a body of research that

When applicable, we assess these trends in light of

highlights the shortcomings associated with a straight

extant research. A detailed, state-by-state overview of

risk management approach (that is, an approach that

current practices for each substantive area can be found

emphasizes monitoring offenders without attempting to

in the appendices.

address their needs). According to some studies, risk
management strategies have a negligible impact on

PRISON-BASED TREATMENT

recidivism rates among the general offender population

Our analysis of prison-based treatment indicates that

when they are used in isolation; additional research

while few states are able to provide treatment to all

suggests that this is true of sex offenders as well.38

imprisoned sex offenders who are eligible, the treatment

On a different note, a recent study in Vermont

services that are currently in place are grounded in

examined the impact of polygraph techniques on

evidence-based approaches such as CBT and relapse

recidivism rates among 208 adult male sex offenders

prevention. There is less emphasis on drug therapy and

who were both receiving treatment and under community

polygraph monitoring, which have not yet been

supervision. Half of the people in this sample group were

adequately evaluated by researchers. Our qualitative

subject to polygraph monitoring. Researchers found that

analysis of survey data identified four trends: the limited

although significantly fewer people in the group that was

availability of prison-based treatment; the widespread

subject to polygraph monitoring were charged with non-

use of evidence-based treatment; the growing use of

sexual violent offenses, there were no significant

treatment standards; and the widespread use of risk (but
not needs) assessments.

35

Division of Probation Services, Special Analysis (Denver, CO: State
Court Administrators Office, Judicial Branch, 2007); M. Walsh,
“Overview of the IPSO Program—Intensive Parole for Sex Offenders
– in Framingham Massachusetts, Presentation by the parole board
chair to the National Governors Association policy meeting on sexual
offenders. November 15, 2005. San Francisco, CA.
36
This includes revocations for technical violations and new arrests.
37
John R. Hepburn, and Marie L. Griffin, “The Effect of Social Bonds
on Successful Adjustment to Probation: An Event History Analysis,”
Criminal Justice Review, 29, no. 1 (2004).
38
Kurt Bumy, Tom Talbot, and Madeline Carter, Managing the
Challenges of Sex Offender Reentry (Silver Spring, MD: Center for
Sex Offender Management, 2007).

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Limited availability. Prison-based treatment for sex
offenders is available in most states. In general, though,
the treatment capacity of prisons and jails is quite

39

R.J. McGrath, G.E. Cumming, S.E. Hoke, and M.O. Bonn-Miller,
“Outcomes in a Community Sex Offender Treatment Program: A
Comparison Between Polygraphed and Matched Non-polygraphed
Offenders,” Sex Abuse 19 (2007): 381-393.

Vera Institute of Justice 8

limited, especially when compared with community-

Very few states employ drug therapy as part of

based programs. Across the 37 states that responded to

prison-based treatment on anything other than a case-by-

our survey of prison-based treatment, we found that the

case basis. Among those states that do administer drugs,

percentage of imprisoned sex offenders in treatment at

most use anti-depressants such as selective serotonin

any given time ranged from 1 to 33 percent. Interviews

reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as opposed to chemical

with policymakers and treatment providers suggest that

castration or other types of hormonal therapy—the types

limited institutional capacity was the primary reason

of drug therapy that are generally associated with

these figures were so low. Only one state (Pennsylvania)

medical treatment of sex offenders in the research

reported that treatment is available in all facilities; in

literature. Because very few studies have examined the

contrast, 13 states reported that treatment was either

role of anti-depressants in prison-based treatment for sex

unavailable altogether or available in only one facility.

offenders, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the

Our findings also suggest that it is especially difficult for

impact of current drug therapy practices.

female sex offenders to access treatment. Fewer than half

While polygraphs are more prevalent than drug

of the participating states reported that treatment is

therapy in the context of prison-based treatment, they are

available in at least one women’s prison. (We did not,

hardly widespread. Fewer than half of the states that

however, directly ask about the availability of treatment

responded to our survey reported using polygraphs in

in women’s prisons, so the actual number may be

some capacity in prison-based treatment programs.

higher.)

Unfortunately, as noted earlier, there is very little

In light of the limited availability of prison-based

research (as of spring 2008 we were unable to find a

treatment programs, it is not surprising that very few

single study) that examines the impact of polygraph

states require all incarcerated sex offenders to undergo

monitoring on sexual recidivism.

treatment. Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, and New Jersey were

A few states reported assigning people to different

the only states that reported mandatory treatment in

treatment programs based on their level of risk. This

prison without any qualifiers. (In other words, all

practice is consistent with criminological research, which

incarcerated sex offenders in those states are presumably

shows that, in the general population of offenders, those

required to undergo treatment.) Other states provide

who are higher risk achieve better outcomes when they

treatment to select groups of sex offenders, or offer

receive more intensive programming, and those who are

education that does not technically qualify as treatment.

lower risk do better in less intensive programming.41

Montana, for example, requires all people convicted of a

Finally, a number of states have treatment programs

sex offense to participate in a 15-week group educational

that employ either multiple treatment components or a

program with a sex therapist prior to being screened for

progressive series of phases (or both). Most multi-phase

further treatment; Ohio mandates treatment for all

programs begin with an educational component. The

medium- and high-risk sex offenders, as defined by

content and purpose of this educational component

40

scores on the STATIC-99 risk instrument.

varies from program to program: In Colorado and
Montana, for example, the first phase of treatment

Evidence-based treatment methods. Our survey

involves providing an overview of the program so that

indicates that most prison-based treatment programs rely

participants know what to expect before they begin. In

heavily on CBT, a treatment that, as noted earlier, is

Ohio, on the other hand, the first phase consists of a

supported by research.

“psychoeducation” program that explains to participants

40
The STATIC-99 is an actuarial risk assessment instrument that
predicts risk for sexual recidivism among adult males based on 10
factors that are stable over time.

41

D.A. Andrews and J. Bonta, The Psychology of Criminal Conduct.
3rd edition (Cincinnati, OH: Anderson, 2003).

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 9

the nature of their mental illness to help them prevent

STATIC-99. In general, standardized instruments are

relapse.

more common than customized instruments, though it
remains unclear to what extent such standardized

Standards for treatment. Most states have standards

instruments have been validated for the particular uses

that define the parameters of treatment programming,

individual states put them to.

although only 15 of the 37 states that responded to our

Only five states (Colorado, Illinois, Utah, Vermont,

survey reported that their standards had been developed

and Wisconsin) reported having developed customized

by independent bodies outside of the department of

risk assessment tools based on statistical data drawn

corrections. The existence of treatment standards is

from local sex offender populations.43 Two of the most

significant because it creates a system of accountability

widely recognized customized state tools are the

among criminal justice agencies and providers and

Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool (MnSOST-R)

encourages them to use evidence-based techniques.

and the Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender Risk

Independent standards provide an additional level of

(VASOR), both of which are being used in a number of

oversight and, thus, encourage criminal justice agencies

other states.

and treatment providers to adopt responsible and

Although the use of risk assessment tools is fairly

effective approaches to treatment. Moreover, the fact that

widespread, only a few states use actuarial needs

independent standards are usually drafted by mental

assessments in prison. (The two types of instruments

health professionals and other authorities suggests that

serve very different purposes in the context of prison-

such standards are more likely to be effective than

based treatment: risk assessments are primarily used to

standards created by correctional officials. Among the

predict the likelihood that a sex offender will recidivate;

states with standards that were created by independent,

needs assessments provide information about “dynamic”

legislatively created bodies are Colorado, Connecticut,

factors—such as alcoholism and negative moods—that

42

Kentucky, and Texas. Several other states—among

change over time. Information about dynamic factors can

them Washington, Vermont, and Montana—have

then be used to craft individual treatment plans with

standards that were created by independent bodies that

targeted interventions that can be re-evaluated over

were not legislatively created.

time.) Only about one-quarter of states reported using a
standardized needs assessment instrument in prison

Risk and needs assessments. A great majority of

settings; Vermont is the only state that has developed its

participating states use at least one actuarial risk

own needs assessment instrument.44 The Vermont

assessment instrument for predicting sexual recidivism

instrument is distinct from other needs assessment

among people incarcerated for sex offenses. Such tools

instruments in that it can be used not only to identify

have the advantage of determining risk through statistical

possible interventions, but also to assess progress in

relationships, rather than through subjective clinical

treatment.

judgments. The most widely used risk assessment
instrument is a standardized instrument known as the

42
Both Delaware and New Mexico recently passed legislation to
create sex offender management boards (SOMB) for the purpose of
drafting treatment standards. In addition, California and West Virginia
are currently developing standards tied to legislative initiatives:
California has a SOMB and recently created a treatment committee,
which submitted a report to the state legislature in early 2008. In West
Virginia, the Department of Health and Human Resources is
developing standards to meet requirements of the 2006 Child
Protective Act.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

43
Minnesota has one as well—the MnSOST-R—but did not
participate in the study.
44
The MnSOST-R includes some dynamic factors, but in this report,
needs assessment instruments have been defined as those that contain
ACUTE dynamic factors. Among those that are commonly recognized
are the ACUTE, Vermont Treatment Needs and Progress Scale,
Multiphasic Sex Inventory (MSI), Psychological Inventory of
Criminal Thinking Styles (PICS), Sex Offender Need Assessment
Rating (SONAR), and COMPAS.

Vera Institute of Justice 10

COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT

programs than in prison-based programs. Thirty-two out

In most states, the treatment that is provided for sex

of 36 states that responded reported using polygraphs in

offenders under community supervision is, like that

some capacity for sex offenders on community

which is available for incarcerated sex offenders,

supervision. A few states reported using them for

grounded in evidence-based approaches such as CBT.

multiple purposes, including assessing the offender’s

Most states also reported efforts to ensure that consistent

ability to admit the full extent of his or her crime;

treatment is available for people returning home from

assessing the offender’s criminal history; obtaining

prison. In general, sex offenders in the community have

information about victims; and assessing the extent to

greater access to treatment than those in prison, although

which an offender is complying with treatment and

in many states access to treatment is at least partially

supervision requirements (the most common use). As

paid for by offender fees.

noted earlier, there is little evidence that polygraphs are

There are many different community-based
treatment programs for sex offenders. At the county

effective in reducing recidivism rates, so it is unclear
whether or not these practices should be expanded.

level, where most probation is administered, there can be
considerable variation in the content and structure of

Consistency between prison-based and community-

these programs. To simplify the process of gathering

based treatment programs. In most states, correctional

information on community-based treatment, we focused

institutions and community supervision agencies share

exclusively on programs at the state level, most of which

information about the case histories and treatment plans

target people on parole.

of sex offenders who are returning to the community
from prison. By communicating in this manner, these

Evidence-based treatment. As was the case for prison-

states aim to ensure that treatment is provided

based treatment programs, almost all community-based

consistently during the transition period—a goal that is

treatment programs use CBT to some extent; many also

consistent with the unified approach to sex offender

use relapse prevention, arousal control (a technique for

management emphasized in the containment model. The

reducing deviant sexual urges), and victim empathy (a

majority of states that took part in our survey reported

technique that helps sex offenders become aware of the

that even in cases where a person begins treatment in

impact of their actions on victims.) Again, the

prison but does not continue treatment under community

prevalence of CBT is consistent with research that shows

supervision, prison officials and community supervision

this method is effective in reducing recidivism.

officials communicate about the person’s prison-based

Community-based treatment programs are also

treatment. In Montana, for example, community

similar to prison-based treatment programs in their

treatment providers generally call prison case managers

reluctance to use drug therapy on anything other than a

to learn more about a person’s treatment while in prison,

case-by-case basis. Although officials in about half of

while in Colorado prison-based treatment providers send

the states that responded to our survey reported that drug

treatment records on to community-based providers as a

therapy is sometimes used for sex offenders under

part of the standard discharge procedure.

community supervision, most also noted that it is not a
standard component of treatment. A number of states

Greater availability but limited state funding. Our

reported using hormonal drug therapy in addition to

data also suggest that treatment is more readily available

chemical drug therapy—almost always only rarely or on

under community supervision than in institutional

a case-by-case basis.

settings. This is to be expected, given the higher risk of

On the other hand, the use of polygraph tests appears
to be much more prevalent in community-based
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

recidivism among offenders who re-integrate into
society. All of the states that participated in our
Vera Institute of Justice 11

community treatment interview reported that treatment is

limited. Although sex offenders in most states are

available in some capacity for sex offenders under

eligible for general reentry programs, only about a third

community supervision; about two-thirds described the

of participating states reported that they have reentry

distribution of treatment providers as “statewide.”

programming that targets the specific needs of this

The number of treatment providers varied greatly

population. In addition, the role of faith-based

from one state to another, ranging from three (in both

organizations in providing reentry programs for sex

Arkansas and Washington, DC) to 427 (in Texas). There

offenders is not especially prominent. On the other hand,

was also a great deal of variation in treatment settings.

case managers—people assigned to help sex offenders

Most states contract with private providers in some

plan and carry out reentry plans—are becoming more

capacity; some states contract with a single provider,

common in prisons.

others work with an assortment of different providers.
An example of the former is Connecticut, which

Lack of sex-offender specific initiatives. Especially

contracts with the Connection Inc.’s Center for the

striking was the finding that many states do not have

Treatment of Problem Sexual Behavior (CTPSB) to

reentry initiatives for sex offenders.45 Most states

provide all treatment to people on probation and parole.

reported that they provide at least some services for

(CTPSB employs a staff of 30). Examples of the latter

offenders (including sex offenders) during reentry, but

include Washington and Ohio. In Washington, treatment

only around half reported having specific reentry

is provided by both the Department of Corrections and

initiatives to coordinate the delivery of those services.

private contractors. In Ohio, there are two types of

None reported having a reentry initiative specifically for

residential programming for sex offenders in the

sex offenders. Both Colorado and Ohio reported that

community: halfway houses that provide sex offender-

they use the COSA model (discussed earlier in the

specific programming (in addition to other types of

section on reentry programming), but because COSA

programming) for offenders on probation and parole, and

focuses on post-release support, it is not, technically

community-based correctional facilities, which provide

speaking, a reentry initiative. Finally, we found that in

diversionary programs for low-risk sex offenders on

most states that provide services to sex offenders at some

probation.

point during reentry, those services are available in all

For many community-based treatment programs,

prisons throughout the state.

funding appears to be a significant concern. Most states
reported that at least some funding comes directly from

Case managers in prison and community settings.

offenders; around one-quarter of states reported that

Our review also indicates that case managers—people

offender fees are the only source of funding for

assigned to help sex offenders plan and carry out

community-based treatment. In these states, access to

individual reentry plans—are almost as widely available

community-based treatment is at least partially

in prisons as they are in the community. This is a very

dependent on the sex offender’s ability to pay for it.

positive development; as mentioned earlier,
collaboration between institutional and community case

REENTRY PROGRAMMING

managers has been identified as one of the key

Given that most sex offenders who are sentenced to

components of successful reentry. About half of the

prison are eventually released into the community,

states we interviewed reported that some sort of case

reentry programming has recently become a topic of
significant interest in the field of sex offender
management. Yet, our review has revealed that reentry
programming for sex offenders in the United States is
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

45
For the purposes of this report, a reentry initiative is distinct from
reentry programming in that it represents a comprehensive effort to
provide well-coordinated services to people who are making the
transition home from prison. In general, reentry initiatives regulate the
provision of services both before and after release.

Vera Institute of Justice 12

manager is assigned to offenders while they are still in

Washington reported that at least half of all nonprofit

prison. Our survey also indicates that this practice is not

reentry service providers are faith-based, and in

limited to states with a particular reentry initiative in

Michigan, faith-based organizations play a role in the

place. Montana, for example, does not have a reentry

development of reentry policy through county-level

initiative; nonetheless, probation officers begin working

reentry steering committees. In Delaware, nonprofit

with offenders to prepare them for reentry about 90 days

organizations generally do not provide services to sex

prior to release. In many states, the role of post-release

offenders; however, the few that do are faith-based.

case manager is filled by probation and/or parole
officers, although some states (such as Pennsylvania and

COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Utah) employ specialized case managers for that

The last of the four substantive areas on which we

purpose.46 In Washington State, some service providers

surveyed policymakers and treatment providers was the

begin working with offenders six to twelve months

supervision of sex offenders in the community. As in

before release and continue working with them in the

previous sections, our discussion here is limited to

community.

supervision at the state level. In some states, that means
both probation and parole. In other states (such as

Role of faith-based organizations. Our data suggest

Kansas), it also means community corrections agencies

that in most jurisdictions, faith-based organizations do

separate from probation and parole. In still other states,

not play a central role in the provision of post-release

where probation is administered at the county-level, it

reentry services for the general population of offenders.

means parole alone. And in a few states (Pennsylvania is

While a number of states have adopted the COSA model,

an example), probation and parole are administered at

which, as discussed earlier, makes extensive use of

both the state and county level. In order to simplify our

volunteers from faith-based organizations to support and

discussion, we do not distinguish here between parole-

monitor sex offenders returning to the community, very

based practices and probation-based practices on the

few states cited COSA as a reentry initiative. Indeed, the

state level. For more information on these issues, please

role of faith-based organizations in reentry appears

refer to the individual state appendices.

difficult to measure. Most interview respondents could

Our review indicates that needs assessments are

only estimate the involvement of faith-based

increasingly being administered to sex offenders under

organizations in very general terms (e.g., some, limited),

community supervision. In addition, we found that in

and Vera researchers were unable to obtain precise data

most states, community supervision agencies pursue two

about the proportion of service providers that are faith-

goals: managing risk and providing services. Research

based. That said, respondents from a few states did

suggests that this is an effective approach to reducing

report that faith-based organizations either play or are

recidivism.

expected to begin to play a significant role in the
provision of reentry services. In Ohio, for example, a law

Increasing use of needs assessments. There is a

(HB 113) was recently passed that requires the

growing use of needs assessment instruments for sex

Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections to work

offenders under community supervision. One prominent

with faith-based organizations to develop prison-based

example is the ACUTE, which was adapted from the Sex

mentorship reentry programs. Respondents from

Offender Need Assessment Rating (another needs
assessment tool) and includes seven scales of acute

46

In both Pennsylvania and Utah, sex offenders are assigned to a
“transitional coordinator,” a parole agent charged with helping the
newly released person re-integrate into the community immediately
upon release from state prison. After 90 days, the person’s case is then
transferred to a general parole agent.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 13

dynamic factors, which change rapidly.47 As mentioned

sex offenders under community supervision. Specialized

earlier, the use of such tools is a positive development,

provisions are supervision conditions—such as

as they can track changes in dynamic risk factors over

restrictions on an offender’s contact with minors—that

time and modify supervision practices according to

apply specifically to sex offenders. In general, they aim

changes in risk levels. More than half of the states that

to enhance community supervision and reduce exposure

responded to our survey reported that they use actuarial

to cues that are likely to trigger deviant behavior. In

needs assessment tools to manage sex offenders under

many states, specialized provisions are reserved for

community supervision—a figure that is much higher

specialized caseloads that include only sex offenders.50

than the proportion of states that use these tools in prison

(Probation and parole officers who administer these

48

settings. As previously mentioned, Vermont has

caseloads have generally undergone specialized

developed a customized instrument that assesses both

training.)
In addition, more than half of the states that reported

needs and treatment progress, and this instrument has
recently been adopted in West Virginia as well.
In addition to needs assessments, almost all of the

back have lifetime supervision (mandatory supervision
for the rest of a person’s life). In most cases, this

states we surveyed administer at least one type of

sanction is only used for high-risk or violent sex

actuarial risk assessment to sex offenders under

offenders: In Iowa, for example, only people who are

community supervision. The STATIC-99 is the most

convicted of a Class C felony sex offense or higher are

prevalent risk assessment tool: 24 out of the 29 states we

eligible for lifetime supervision.
Our review does not indicate that specialized

interviewed reported using it in some capacity. Only
three states reported having developed customized risk

provisions, specialized caseloads, and lifetime

assessment tools for sex offenders under community

supervision have displaced efforts to provide services,

supervision, although customized tools are used more

however. As noted earlier, most of the states that

frequently in the community than in prison. The

responded to our survey reported that treatment has

customized risk assessment tools that were developed in

become an important part of community supervision.

Colorado and Vermont, as discussed earlier, are

This finding is consistent with research showing that

administered both in prison and to those under

community supervision that combines surveillance and

community supervision. Additionally, the Iowa

intensive supervision with treatment and rehabilitation

Department of Corrections is in the process of

services is more effective at reducing recidivism than

developing a customized tool called the ISORA 8 for sex

surveillance alone, both among the general offending

49

offenders on both probation and parole.

population and among sex offenders.51
50

Focus on treatment and monitoring. Our review also
revealed that most states have specialized provisions for

47
ACUTE dynamic factors are distinct from stable dynamic factors,
which change over longer periods of time.
48
Again, needs assessment instruments are defined as those that
contain ACUTE dynamic factors. These include the ACUTE,
Vermont Treatment Needs and Progress Scale, Multiphasic Sex
Inventory (MSI), Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles
(PICS), Sex Offender Need Assessment Rating (SONAR), and
COMPAS.
49
Alabama; Kansas; Montana; Washington, DC; and Wyoming also
reported having customized risk assessment tools under community
supervision, but they described them as general risk assessment
instruments, rather than sex offender-specific.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Some states do not have specialized caseloads for all sex offenders
under community supervision, but this is usually because not all
jurisdictions have enough sex offenders to warrant specialized
caseloads. Additionally, some states require only those sex offenders
who meet certain risk or offense criteria to be supervised on
specialized caseloads. For example, in Indiana, if an offender on
parole is originally convicted of or has a history of at least one of a
specific subset of offenses, including, rape, criminal deviant conduct,
molestation, or failure to register, he or she is required to be
supervised under the Sex Offender Management and Monitoring
Program.
51
S. Aos, P. Phipps, R. Barnoski, and R. Lieb, Evidence-Based Adult
Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not. Document
number 06-01-1201. (Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for
Public Policy, 2006); R.J. McGrath, G.F. Cumming, J.A. Livingston,
and S.E. Hoke, “Outcome of a Treatment Program for Adult Sex
Offenders: From Prison to Community,” Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 18 (2003): 3-17.

Vera Institute of Justice 14

Conclusions

Research suggests that this type of inter-agency
communication can help reduce recidivism.

Our findings can be summarized as follows:
•

•

both manage risk and provide services. Research

In both institutional (prison-based) and

suggests that this is an effective approach to

community settings, the treatment of sex
offenders is generally grounded in evidencebased practices, especially cognitive-behavioral
therapy (CBT). In general, treatment is much
more available in the community than in
institutional settings.
•

In a majority of participating states, community-

In general, community supervision agencies

reducing recidivism.
•

A limited number of states are conducting
research on their own treatment, reentry, and
supervision initiatives. There have been almost
no studies that examine these programs from a
cost-benefit perspective.

based treatment for sex offenders is supported,
at least in part, by collecting fees from those in
treatment—a circumstance that may limit access
to these programs.
•

Standardized risk assessment tools such as the
STATIC-99 are now widely used in both prisonbased and community-based treatment programs
across the nation. However, a lack of data
prevented us from determining the number of
states that have validated these tools for their
local populations.

•

Needs assessment tools, especially the ACUTE,
are becoming more prevalent in community
supervision.

•

We found no reentry initiatives that specifically
target sex offenders. Although sex offenders in
most states are eligible for general reentry
programming, there are few reentry programs
that address the unique needs of this population.
One exception is Circles of Support and
Accountability (COSA), a program that
encourages high-risk offenders to develop

The variety in treatment and reentry practices across
different states (and even from one jurisdiction to
another) makes it impractical to devise blanket
recommendations from these findings. However, the
need for more rigorous research on treatment and reentry
practices for sex offenders is clear. Although the current
body of research indicates that cognitive-behavioral
therapy and the containment model of supervision are
both effective in reducing recidivism, many questions
remain unanswered: Many of the practices described in
this report, for example, consist of multiple components,
but it is unclear how each of the individual components
affects recidivism or improves offender outcomes such
as reintegration. Furthermore, there is very little research
that provides a clear picture of what works for whom.
Finally, it bears repeating that there is a noticeable lack
of research on the cost-savings associated with treatment
and reentry programs. Finding answers to these
questions will help policymakers create more informed
and more effective policies for the treatment and
management of sex offenders.

support networks in the community. COSA has
been piloted in several states.
•

In most states, correctional institutions and
community supervision agencies share
information about the case histories and
treatment plans of sex offenders who are
returning to the community from prison.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 15

Bibliography

Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Research
in Brief, 1997.

Adams, Devon B. Summary of State Sex Offender
Registries. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics
(Fact Sheet): March 2002, NCJ 192265.

Greenfield, Lawrence A. Sex Offenses and Offenders: An
Analysis of Data on Rape and Sexual Assault.
Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997, NCJ
163392.

Andrews, D.A., and J. Bonta. The Psychology of
Criminal Conduct. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson, 2003.
Aos, Steve, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake.
Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What
Works and What Does Not. Olympia, WA: Washington
State Institute for Public Policy, 2006.
Aos, Steve, Marna Miller, and Elizabeth Drake.
Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future
Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime
Rates. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for
Public Policy, 2006.
Babbie, Earl R. The Practice of Social Research (11th
Edition). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth, 2005.
Beck, A.J., and P.M. Harrison. Prisoners in 2000.
Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000.
Bumby, Kurt. Understanding Treatment for Adults and
Juveniles Who Have Committed Sex Offenses. Silver
Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management,

Hanson, R.K., A. Gordon, A.J.R. Harris, J.K. Marques,
W. Murphy, V.L. Quinsey, and M.C. Seto. “First Report
of the Collaborative Outcome Data Project on the
Effectiveness of Psychological Treatment for Sex
Offenders.” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and
Treatment, 14 (2002): 169-194.
Harrison, P.M., and A.J. Beck. Prisoners in 2004.
Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004.
Hepburn, John R., and Marie L. Griffin. “The Effect of
Social Bonds on Successful Adjustment to Probation: An
Event History Analysis.” Criminal Justice Review, 29,
no. 1 (2004).
Looman, J., J. Abracen, and T. Nicholaichuk,
“Recidivism Among Treated Sexual Offenders and
Matched Controls.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence
15, no. 3 (2000): 279-290.
Lösel, F., and M. Schmucker. “The Effectiveness of
Treatment for Sexual Offenders: A Comprehensive
Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Experimental Criminology
1(2005): 117-146.

2006.
Bumby, Kurt, Tom Talbot, and Madeline Carter.
Managing the Challenges of Sex Offender Reentry.
Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender
Management, 2007.
Bumby, K.M., T.B. Talbot, and M.M. Carter. “Sex
Offender Reentry: Facilitating Public Safety through
Successful Transition and Community Reintegration.”
Criminal Justice and Behavior (in press).
Division of Probation Services. Special Analysis.
Denver, CO: State Court Administrators Office, Judicial
Branch, 2007.
England, K.A., S. Olsen, T. Zakrajsek, P. Murray, and R.
Ireson. “Cognitive/Behavioral Treatment for Sexual
Offenders: An Examination of Recidivism.” Sexual
Abuse: A Journal of Treatment and Practice 13, no. 4
(2001): 223-231.
English, K., S. Pullen, and L. Jones. Managing Adult Sex
Offenders in the Community: A Containment Approach.
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Lowden, Kerry, Nicole Hetz, Linda Harrison, Diane
Patrick, Kim English, and Diane Pasini-Hill. Evaluation
of Colorado’s Therapeutic Community for Sex
Offenders: A Report of Findings. Denver, CO: Office of
Research and Statistics, Division of Criminal Justice,
2003.
Mander, A., M. Atrops, A. Barnes, and R. Munafo. Sex
Offender Treatment Program: Initial Recidivism Study.
Anchorage, AK: Alaska Department of Corrections,
1996.
Marques, J.K., M. Wiederanders, D.M. Day, C. Nelson,
and A. Van Ommeren. “Effects of a Relapse Prevention
Program on Sexual Recidivism: Final Results from
California’s Sex Offender Treatment and Evaluation
Project (SOTEP).” Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research
and Treatment 17 (2005): 79-107.
McGrath, R.J., G.E. Cumming, S.E. Hoke, and M.O.
Bonn-Miller. “Outcomes in a Community Sex Offender
Treatment Program: A Comparison Between
Vera Institute of Justice 16

Polygraphed and Matched Non-polygraphed Offenders.”
Sex Abuse 19 (2007): 381-393.
McGrath, R.J., G. Cumming, J.A. Livingston, and S.
Hoke. “Outcome of a Treatment Program for Adult Sex
Offenders: From Prison to Community.” Journal of
Interpersonal Violence 18, no. 1 (2003): 3-17.

Wilson, R.J., J.E. Picheca, and M. Prinzo. “Evaluating
the Effectiveness of Professionally Facilitated
Volunteerism in the Community-Based Management of
High-Risk Sexual Offenders: Part Two—A Comparison
of Recidivism Rates.” The Howard Journal, 46, no. 4
(2007): 327-337.

McGrath, R.J., S.E. Hoke, and J.E. Vojtisek, “CognitiveBehavioral Treatment of Sex Offenders: A Treatment
Comparison and Long-Term Follow-Up Study.”
Criminal Justice and Behavior 25 (1998): 203-225.
National Center for Missing & Exploited Children,
Registered Sex Offenders in the United States per
100,000 Population (map), March 25, 2008.
Petersilia, Joan. When Prisoners Come Home: Parole
and Prisoner Reentry. New York, NY: New York Open
Society Institute, 2003.
Phipps, Polly, Kim Korinek, Steve Aos, and Roxanne
Lieb. Research Findings on Adult Corrections
Programs: A Review. Olympia, WA: Washington State
Institute for Public Policy, 1999.
Quinsey, V.L.E., G.T. Harris, M.E. Rice, and C.A.
Cormier. Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing
Risk. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association, 1998.
Sabol, W.J., H. Couture, and P.M. Harrison. Prisoners in
2006. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics,
2006.
Sex Offender Supervision: 2000 Report to the
Legislature. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of
Corrections, 2000.
Song, L., and Roxanne Lieb. Washington State Sex
Offenders: Overview of Recidivism Studies. Olympia,
WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 1995.
Walsh, M. “Overview of the IPSO Program—Intensive
Parole for Sex Offenders–in Framingham Massachusetts,
Presentation by the parole board chair to the National
Governor’s Association policy meeting on sexual
offenders. November 15, 2005. San Francisco, CA.
Wilson, R.J., and J.E. Picheca. “Circles of Support and
Accountability: Engaging the Community in Sexual
Offender Management” in B.K. Schwartz (Ed.), The Sex
Offender: Issues in Assessment, Treatment, and
Supervision of Adult and Juvenile Populations. (pp 13.113.21) Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, 2005.
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 17

Appendix A: State Overview Tables of Prison-Based Treatment52
Table 1: Availability of Prison-Based Treatment, by State
State

# of
prisons
with
treatment
0
3
Not
available

Program
in
female
prison?
9
Not
available

California

0

-

-

Colorado

5

9

9

Connecticut

5

9

9

Delaware

1

Florida
Georgia
Idaho

0
0
3

Illinois

7

Indiana

3

9

Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine

2
4
5
1

9
9

Missouri

3

9

Montana

1

9

New
Hampshire

2

737

15%

New Jersey

1

685

Not
available

New Mexico

3

North
Carolina

1

Ohio

7

Oklahoma

4

9

Oregon

0

-

Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas

Pennsylvania

All 26

Rhode Island

Not
available

South
Carolina
South Dakota
Texas54

State treatment
standard (aside
from DOC)
-

5,216
Not
available
Over
23,000
Not
available
Not
available

Not
available

Not
available
1%

1,346

9

6,800

3%

9

4,000

9

1,396
2,700
2,178
357
Not
available

9

9

580

4,743
9,800
3,500
9
9

9
9

7%

-

670

9

% of sex
offenders
in
treatment
8.6%

Not
available
8%

661

1
4
3

# of sex
offenders
in prison

9
9

53

6,000

28%
30%
11%
20%
16%
Not
available
Not
available

16%
1.1%
5%
3%
20%

400

Not
available

2,800

1.7%

804
26,121

13%
2%

52

The findings presented in all overview tables represent general characteristics of state practices but do not provide specific details about
qualifying factors or circumstances. Please refer to individual state answer templates for more detailed information about each of the states.
53
The DOC standard applies to programming for treatment in general, but Pennsylvania also has a separate set of standards governing treatment
for sexually violent predators (SVP). These standards were developed by the Sex Offender Assessment Board (SOAB).

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 18

54

State

# of
prisons
with
treatment

Program
in
female
prison?

Utah

1

Vermont

3

Virginia

16

Washington

2

9

West Virginia

8

9

Wisconsin
Wyoming

8
1

9

State treatment
standard (aside
from DOC)

# of sex
offenders
in prison

9

1,860

9

426

9

3,500
3,187
5,869

9

4,586
355

% of sex
offenders
in
treatment
Not
available
20%
5%
6.5%
Not
available
12%
33%

Responses for New Jersey and Texas reflect only intensive treatment.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 19

Table 2: In-Prison Treatment Components, by State55
State

Duration

CBT

Alaska

12-24
months
12
months
20-24
months
12
months
Not
available
26 weeks
-8
months
24
months56
2 months
14-16
months
14.8
months
24
months
48
months
9-12
months
15 to 30
months
6 months
minimum
Varies
18
months

-

Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Missouri
Montana
New
Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
North
Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South
Carolina
South Dakota

9

Relapse
prevention
-

Arousal
control
-

Victim
empathy
-

Psychoeducation
-

Drug
therapy
-

Truth
test
-

9

9

9

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

-

-

9

9

9
-

-

-

-

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9

Not
available

9
9

9
Not
available

-

Not
available

9

9
Not
available

9
Not available

Not
available

Not
available
9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

5 months

9

9

9

9

15-22
months
12-16
months
9 -27
months
Varies
20
months
12
months

9

9

9

9

9

9

-

-

-

-

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9

-

-

-

9
9

55

Table 2 lists only selected treatment components. Components were checked off if a state reported its use to some extent (however minimal).
For more detail on content of programming and the frequency at which specific components are employed, please refer to individual state answer
templates.
56
This figure is only for two of the treatment program. For the other programs, the duration of treatment varies.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 20

State

Duration

Texas57

18
months
12-18
months
6-36
months
2-3 years
13
months
Varies
6 months
- 2 years
24
months

Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

57

CBT

Relapse
prevention
9

Arousal
control

9

Victim
empathy

Drug
therapy

Truth
test

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9

9
9

Psychoeducation

9

9
9

9

9

9

Responses for Texas reflect only intensive treatment.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 21

Table 3: Assessment Tools Administered in Prison, by State58
State
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa59
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Missouri
Montana
New
Hampshire
New Mexico
North
Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Texas60
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

STATIC-99
9
9
9
9
9

RRASOR

SONAR

LSI-R

9

MnSOST-R

VASOR

9

Needs
assessment
9

9

Customized tool

9

9
9
9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9
9

9
9

9
9
9
9

9
9

9

9

9

9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9
9

9
-

-

-

9

9
9

9
9
9

-

-

9
9

9
9

-

9
9

9
9

9
9
9

9

58
Table 3 includes only selected risk assessment tools. Because only a limited number of states employ actuarial needs assessment tools, they
were not listed separately. For more information on the use of risk and needs assessment tools, please refer to the individual state answer
templates.
59
Assessment tools are used but do not currently drive treatment decisions
60
Responses for Texas reflect only intensive treatment.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 22

Appendix B: State Overview Tables of Community-Based Treatment
Table 4: Availability and Funding of Community-Based Treatment, by State
State
Alaska
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
DC
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Michigan
Missouri
Montana
New
Hampshire
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania69
South
Carolina
South Dakota
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington70
West Virginia
Wyoming

# of
providers61
18
3
Not available
179
1664
Not available
3
60
34
12
40065
45-50
15-2066
13
1467
20
50
65
56
15

Statewide
distribution62
9 *

Not available

Not available

Not available
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9 *
Not available
9 *
9 *
9
9
9 *
9

68

60
10
6
Not available
Not available
25

Not available
9
9

Not available

Not available

7
427
Several dozen
to 100 or so
50
26
871
772
15

9
9
9
9
9

State funding
9
9
9
9
9

Offender
funding
9
9
9
9

Other
funding63
9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9
9

9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Not available
9
9
9
9
9
9

9
9
9
9
9
Not
available
9
9

Not available

9

9

9
9
9
9
9

9

61
If a state contracts with one provider for all treatment services, the number in this column represents the number of office locations statewide
(unless otherwise noted).
62
States that reported statewide availability but limited or no availability in rural areas were classified as having a statewide distribution. These
states are marked with an *. States that reported localized availability are left blank.
63
This includes federal, grant, insurance, and provider funding.
64
This number includes only state-contracted providers.
65
Two of these providers are state-sponsored, the rest are private providers.
66
This estimate does not include DOC providers.
67
This number only includes state-sponsored providers, not private treatment providers.
68
This estimate includes juvenile providers.
69
Information reflects only practices and characteristics of Sex Offender Assessment Board Programs for sexually violent predators.
70
For Washington, information reflects only DOC practices, not those of private providers.
71
This number includes only DOC providers. Washington also has numerous private providers.
72
This number includes only DOC providers.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 23

Table 5: Community-Based Treatment Components, by State73
State

Duration

CBT

Relapse
prevention

Arousal
control

Psychoeducation

Truth test

9

Arkansas

24 months

9

California

18 months

9

9

9

9

9

30-48 months
36 months
Varies
18-24 months

9
9
9
9

9
9

9
9

9

9

Florida

30 months

9

9

9

9

9

9

Georgia

Not available

9

9

9

9

9

9

30 months +
aftercare
24 months
Entire
supervision
Entire
supervision
36 months
24 months
Up to lifetime
12-24 months
12 months
minimum
36-48 months
8-48 months

9

Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Michigan
Missouri
Montana
New
Hampshire

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9
9
9
9

9

9
9

9

9

9

9

No prison
treatment
No prison
treatment
Varies

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9
9

9

9
9
Varies

9

9
9

No prison
treatment
9
9

9

9

9

9
9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9
Not available
9

Continuity74
No prison
treatment

24 months

Idaho

9

Drugs therapy

Alaska

Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
DC

9

Victim
empathy

9

9

9

9
9

9
9

9

73

Table 5 lists only selected treatment components. Components were checked off if a state reported its use to some extent (however minimal). For more detail on content of programming and the
frequency at which specific components are employed, please refer to individual state answer templates.
74
States were coded as having continuity if they reported that programming in the community followed from prison-based programming or that there is an exchange of information between institutional
and community agents.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 24

State

Duration

New Mexico

Not available
24 months
minimum
9 months
maximum

North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania76
South Dakota
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington77
West Virginia
Wyoming

75
76
77

CBT
9

Relapse
prevention
9

9

Arousal
control
9

9

Victim
empathy
9
9

Psychoeducation

Drugs therapy
9

9

9

9
9
9
9

9
9
9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9

9
9

9

9

9

9

9
9
9

9
9
9
9

9

Most parolees in North Dakota do not receive treatment in prison. Those that do are recommended to continue with treatment on parole.
Information reflects only practices and characteristics of Sex Offender Assessment Board Programs for sexually violent predators.
For Washington, information reflects only DOC practices, not those of private providers.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

9

9

Vera Institute of Justice 25

Continuity74

9
9

9

60 months
18 months
36 months
Varies
18-36 months
24 months +
12 months
aftercare
24 months
23 months
24 months
Not available

Truth test

No prison
treatment75
9
No prison
treatment
9
9

9

9

9
9
9
9

9
9
9
9

Appendix C: State Overview Table of Reentry Programming
Table 6: Availability of Reentry Services, by State
State
Alaska
Arkansas78
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Massachusetts
Michigan
Missouri
Montana
New Hampshire
New Mexico
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania79
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia

78
79

Pre-release
services
-

Post-release
services
-

# of prisons
0

Specialized sex offender
programming
-

Specific state
initiative
-

Pre-release
case managers
-

Post-release
case managers
-

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9

9
9
9
9

9
9
9
9

9
9
9

9
9
9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

0
0
All
All
Not available
All
All
All
4 of 9
All
All
14 out of 48
11 of 20
All
All
All
All
All
Not available
Not available
Not available
All
All
All
All

9

9
9
9

9

9

9

9
9

9
9

9
9
9
9
9
9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9

9

9

9

9
9
9

9
9
9
Not available

Arkansas is in the process of creating a risk/needs assessment specifically for sex offenders—the instrument is in draft form and is not yet validated.
Responses reflect only post-release services.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 26

9
Not available
9
9
9
9

9
9
Not available
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Not available
9
9
9
9

State
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming

Pre-release
services
9
9
9

Post-release
services
9

# of prisons

9

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

All
All
All

Specialized sex offender
programming
9

Specific state
initiative
9
9

Vera Institute of Justice 27

Pre-release
case managers
9
9
9

Post-release
case managers
9
9
9

Appendix D: State Overview Tables of Community Supervision
Practices
Table 7: Assessment Instruments Administered on Community Supervision, by State
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
DC
Georgia
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Maryland
Michigan
Missouri
Montana
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Dakota
Texas80
Utah
Vermont
Virginia81
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming

80
81

STATIC-99

RRASOR

SONAR

LSI-R

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

MnSOSTR

VASOR

Needs
assessment
9
9
9

9
9
9

9

9
9
9

9
9
9

Customized
tool
9

9

9

9

9

9

9
9

9
9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9

9

9
9
9

9
9
9
9

9

9

9
9

9

9

Responses for Texas reflect only intensive treatment.
STATIC-99 is used only in related to civil commitment

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

9

Vera Institute of Justice 28

Table 8: Specialized Supervision Options for Sex Offenders in the Community, by State82
State

Lifetime supervision
option

Specialized
caseloads

Alabama

9

Alaska

9
9

Arkansas

9
9

California
9

Colorado
Connecticut

Caseload
size
Not
available
58
Not
available
20-70

9

20-40

Varies

25
25
20
160
maximum83

Varies
2-5 years
5-15 years
Not
available
45-64
months
1-3 years
10 years
maximum
2 years –
Life
2 years
2 years
Varies

9
9
9

Georgia

9

9

Idaho

9

9

40-75

Illinois

9

9

20

Indiana

9

9

46

Iowa

9

9

15-30

Kansas
Maryland
Michigan

9

9
9
9

35
57
35+
45
maximum
40
22
47
maximum
50-55
Below 60
50-60
Not
available

Missouri

9

9

Montana
New Mexico

9
9

9
9
9

North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania

9
9
9

South Dakota

9

Texas

9

9

10-40

Utah

9

9

Vermont

9

9

40-80
Not
available
24-40
Not
available
35-40

9
9
9

9

Virginia

12 years
Not
available
3-10 years
10 years
maximum

25

9

(GPS)

Varies

9

Delaware
DC
Florida

9

Duration of
supervision

Washington

9

9

West Virginia

9

9

Wyoming

9

5 years
Varies
5-20 years
Varies
2-5 years
3-6 years
Varies
Not
available
Not
available
36 months
Varies
5 years
3 years
2 years
Not
available

82

Components were checked off if a state reported its use to some extent (however minimal). For more detail on content of programming and the
frequency at which specific components are employed, please refer to individual state answer templates.
83
Refers to total contacts, not number of offenders, per PO.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 29

Appendix E: Individual State Templates
Alabama Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population

Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length

Services
Collaboration

Yes
Not mandatory
• Judge determines supervision for probationers
• Parole is based on the discretionary decision of the three member board
No
• Probation: 1,242 (1,204 males, 38 females (official data from Administrative
Office of Courts database)
• Parole: 183 (180 males, 3 females) (official data from Administrative Office of
Courts database)
• State funding
• Parolees pay $30/month supervision fees
2001
People placed on probation and parole are classified based on a risk/needs
assessment instrument
Low, medium, high
Determines risk and needs
Risk and needs assessment instrument developed specifically for Alabama Board of
Parole and Pardons
Birmingham and Mobile will sometimes have specialized caseloads if personnel are
available
Not available
Not available
Not available
• No average supervision length
• Parole sentences are for the remainder of the sentence
• Probation sentences range from 1-15 years unless a person is sentenced under the
Split Sentence Act, the period for a felony is 5 years and 2 years for a
misdemeanor
• The Alabama Sentencing Commission has a bill in this year to apply the limit to
split sentences as well
Varies by county
Yes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 30

Alaska Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?

• Approximately 5 years ago (June 2003), the Department of Corrections
administration closed all the institutional treatment programs—not just for sex
offenders but for substance abuse as well
• At one point, Department of Corrections had 3 institutional programs, but the
Murkowski administration did not believe that treatment worked. There was also a
budget crunch
• Current administration believes in the need to have institutional treatment and is
trying to reinstitute it but it will take some time
• Fiscal note to start programming currently before the legislature
The Alaska Department of Corrections Standards of Care still exists and provides
basic expectations for programs, should they be restarted
Not applicable
Not applicable

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens

Gender

Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans

Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number

Distribution

Yes
There is nothing prohibiting them from receiving treatment but most non-citizens
tend to get deported once they are released from prison, so there is probably very few
receiving treatment in the community
• Males and females, but not many female sex offenders on probation/parole in
Alaska
• Usually females dealt with individually (not more than 5 or 6 at a time)
• Generally mandatory, but because of a lack of availability, many judges will not
order it
• If there is no treatment available in the community where the offender lives, the
judge will not order it
• Individualized treatment plans generally decided by the treatment provider but in
consultation with the parole officer
• The treatment provider will usually have a “staffing session” with parole
officers—usually there will be multiple treatment providers and parole officers—
they will talk the case through and agree on a plan
• State funding through Department of Corrections
• Those who can afford their own are required to pay for their own
800 statewide (estimate)
Not available
Not available
Not available
• Between 25% and 30% (estimate) mainly due to a lack of resources
• Not enough providers
Not available
Not available
Not available
• 18 statewide (official number, Department of Corrections)
• Only 7 have full-fledged programs with group and individual and organized
programs
• 3 or 4 only do assessments
• Some only individual work—usually not their primary work—psychologists who
are brought in
• Only in cities

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 31

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs

Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration

Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Of the 7 main programs, 3 are in Anchorage, 1 in Fairbanks, 1 in Juneau, (3 largest
cities) 1 in Kenai and 1 in Ketchikan (smaller cites but still easy to get to)
• There is a plan to get one provider based in one of the cities to go out to Bethel on
a regular basis (isolated rural community with high sexual abuse problem)
100%
0%
The range is approximately 40 to 60% (estimate)
• They have had standards for programs longer than any state except New Jersey—
since 1988
• While the providers vary, they are all doing cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse
prevention planning, and victim empathy
• Lots of individual planning—some domestic violence work
• Many have substance abuse problems and providers have them get treatment for
those problems elsewhere
• Not directly
• Make referrals to psychiatrists but it is hard to find those who will work with sex
offenders—currently there are only 3 in the state
• In the past, the drugs used tended to be anti-androgens; now there is some use of
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)
• Statute on polygraphs but not mandated for programs
• Logistics are still being worked out and standards have not been set yet
• Closer to individualized
• There are some core things shared but most treatment is individualized
Not applicable (no prison-based treatment)
• Wide variation
• Minimum of about 18 months—used to be a year when they had prison
treatment—now about two year average (estimate)
Minimal
• The only treatment data is a 1997 study on men who were in institutional treatment
• A few numbers are collected and maintained by hand on community treatment
• No uniform data collection—trying to get things started up again but very difficult
Not available
Not available
1997 study on institutional treatment
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming

Alaska Department of Corrections currently does not have an organized reentry
program but is in the process of developing one
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
• The only thing available is two psychologists that travel to the institutions—they
try to get to as many sex offenders as possible before release but usually only get
to about half of them (estimate)—about 100 each year (estimate)
• They do standard psychiatric tests and risk assessments
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies

• Mandatory, generally
• Some people who were given probation or parole but were rearrested for violations
go back to prison and serve out the rest of the sentence (few individuals)
Court and Parole Board
No
• Probation and Parole
• Small group on furlough from institutions

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 32

Population
Funding
Classification system

Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

782 total—divided between Probation and Parole (estimate)
State
• Risk assessment document from Minnesota or Wisconsin used for some time,
though not validated for Alaska
• Trying to implement LSI-R statewide
• Classification is difficult—there is concern that if someone scores low, they will
be overridden at a higher level
• Officers are reluctant not to supervise someone
Not available
All those under supervision
Low, medium, high
• Trying to get probation to focus more resources and supervision on high risk and
less on low risk—not yet seen as appropriate to not supervise low risk
• STATIC-99, Stable and ACUTE
• Parole and probation officers are trained to use these instruments
• Everyone is supervised by the same division and uses the same tools
• Some are supervised on specialized caseloads
• Not in all areas
Average size is 58 (estimate)
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) training for sexual abusers,
treatment for STATIC-99 and Stable
12 years (estimate)
Community-based treatment, polygraphs, housing when possible, employment
Yes
Minimal
• The only treatment data is a 1997 study on men that were in institutional treatment
• A few numbers are collected and maintained by hand on community treatment
• No uniform data collection—trying to get things started up again but very difficult
Not available
Not available
1997 study on institutional treatment

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 33

Arizona Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available

Average capacity

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• In certain facilities
• Some sex offenders are in specialty housing units, others are not
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
State
• All are eligible but not enough staff to offer it to all at the same time
• At some point while in prison, all sex offenders will be offered treatment
No
Males and females
Not mandatory, but available
• Not mandatory
• Identifies inmates that will be getting out within 3/4 years and once this group is
identified, they will be offered treatment
• No offense type requirements
5,216 as of February 2008 (official, Department of Corrections)
8.6%
• Three:
• One yard is for pre-treatment—offenders who go through pre-treatment for a year
before treatment
• Second yard is treatment yard (males)
• Third yard is for females (females may be in different facilities)
• Can have 200 inmates in active treatment
• 100 in pre-treatment
• 40 females
No waiting lists except for females
0%
1:40 (estimate)
• 1-2 years (estimate)
• 1 year program but some may get longer
Anywhere from 2-3 years
Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention model
No
No
Both—curriculum followed but there is individualized treatment based on unique
characteristics of certain offenders
No
80% (estimate)
Minimum of a Master’s Degree in Behavioral Health
Determine risk and needs
STATIC-99, MCMI 3; Multiphasic sex inventory
Not available
Electronic
Department of Corrections
None

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 34

Arkansas Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
•

Individualized vs. manualized

Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Treatment is available in state prisons
State funded
Every sex offender housed in Arkansas Department of Correction is eligible for
treatment
Yes
Males and females
Treatment is a voluntary program—mentally ill persons may apply and receive
treatment
• Everyone is eligible
• Treatment is recommended if offenders are denied parole due to the severity of
the crime, age of the victim, habitual criminality, injury to victims and if any
weapons were used
Not available
• 235 sex offenders enroll in treatment every three months (official Department of
Correction figure)
• 45-60 graduate every three months (estimate)
Not available
235
There is generally a waiting list to participate in programming (no percentage
available)
25% available at the end of a three month cycle
Not available
12 months (official Department of Correction figure)
3 years prior to earliest transfer eligibility date
Cognitive Behavioral Therapeutic Community Program
No drugs are administered
o Polygraphs and voice stress tests are used
o Administered by the Sex Offenders Screening and Risk Assessment Program
(SOSRA)
The program is manualized, but does individualized treatment plans and counseling
sessions with each sex offender
Not available
Not available
• The state does not have specific standards at the current time
• It is expected that the state will institute standards within the next two years
The state has a pre-assessment which provides a small amount of information to see
if the inmate is interested in receiving treatment
• To provide a glimpse of sex offender’s criminal history
• To assess the sex offender’s willingness to talk about his/her crime
Psychosexual Life History adult male form

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans

Yes
Yes
Males and females
Determined by judge or parole board
• The sentencing judge or parole board stipulated specific requirements for a sex
offender’s treatment (e.g., length of time spent in treatment, type of treatment,

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 35

Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

etc.)
• Treatment providers make decisions about individual treatment plans
Offender-funded
892 (official)
825 (official)
Probation and parole are consolidated under the Department of Community
Corrections
80% (estimate)
15% (estimate)
5% come directly from court (estimate)
3 (estimate)
• Not available in all regions throughout the state
• Available in localized areas
1 out of the 3 treatment providers (estimate)
2 out of the 3 treatment providers (estimate)
83% (estimate)
Cognitive behavioral therapy
1 of the 3 providers administer anti-depressant drugs and impulse control drugs
Yes
Combination of individualized and manualized plans
Yes
2 years
Yes, the state is looking to profile sex offenders
Demographic information, number on community supervision, number of victims,
frequency, general psychosocial
Electronically
Department of Community Corrections and Arkansas Crime Information Center
In the process of using the data for evaluation
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Assessment

Purposes
Tools

Yes
• Community supervision is mandatory for sex offenders if they do not serve their
entire sentence in prison
• Duration of community supervision depends on how much time offender serves in
prison
Eligibility for services is decided and stipulated by a sentencing judge or the parole
board
• Yes
• Eligibility requirements not available
Probation and parole (consolidated under the Department of Community Corrections)
See above for probation and parole
State funded
• The Sex Offender Screening and Risk Assessment (SOSRA) agency was created
when the state passed legislation in 1997 that mandated community notification
• The Division of Community Corrections conducts a risk/needs assessment when
offenders are sentenced or released to community supervision. The same tool is
used for all sex offenders and is not specific to the sex offender population
Assess risk when a sex offender is required to notify the community
• STATIC-99
• The Division of Community Corrections is working on a risk/needs assessment
form specifically for sex offenders—the tool is in draft form and is not yet
validated

Specialized caseloads
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 36

Provisions

Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Sex offenders are required to be on electronic monitoring for a specified period
when first sentenced or released to community supervision
• Sex offenders must also be placed on maximum supervision level for a specified
amount of time when first sentenced or released to community supervision
• There is a sex offender aftercare program for certain sex offenders who are
subjected to more stringent supervision requirements and program participation
• Sex offenders in the aftercare program are required to submit to polygraphs or
voice stress tests every 6 months and must participate in group meetings two
times a month
Not available
• Specialized officers are regular probation/parole officers but receive additional
training on handling sex offenders
Not available
• Sex offenders are eligible for any services that are available through the
Department of Community Corrections
• The Department of Community Corrections offers drug treatment services and
day reporting centers
• Referrals are provided to mental health treatment, sex offender treatment,
education/job training
Yes
Department of Community Corrections has a statewide data system
Not available
Department of Community Corrections
None, data is mainly used for caseload management

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 37

California Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Prison-based treatment questions (except for those highlighted with an *) are answered based on the proposed program but are not
instituted as of yet
Availability
• No sex offender treatment programming in California prisons
• Only treatment available is for substance abuse, but this is not specific to sex
offenders—more general treatment program for which all prisoners are eligible
• Most recently, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
(CDCR) received funding from the state legislature to hire research experts to
develop a sex offender treatment model program for the state’s prisons
• Contracted out to develop a model for California at the end of summer 2007—
patterned after Colorado model
• Currently, budgeting is in process to fund this initiative, but it is unclear when the
funding will actually be allocated—being developed for the current budget
session, but it will more likely be approved in Fiscal Year 2008
Eligibility
Noncitizens
No exclusion by any background characteristics
Gender
Males and females
Mentally ill
• Assumption is that they will be better served in mental health system but no
decision yet
• Juvenile system refers mentally ill sex offenders to the mental health system
Criteria for eligibility
Not available
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
*Over 23,000 (estimate)
Percentage in treatment
Not available
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Not available
Average capacity
Model program has capacity of just under 500 beds (does not mean this will be the
actual capacity)
Percentage with waiting list
Not available
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Not available
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Not available
Average duration
Not available
Enrollment date
Not available
Content
Cognitive behavioral therapy with relapse prevention
Not precluded
• Drugs
Not available
• Truth tests
Not available
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Not available
Completion rate
Not available
Not sure whether or not treatment will be provided through in-house staff or through
Provider certification
contracts with private providers
*STATIC-99 is official risk assessment tool for California (in probation, prison, etc.)
Assessment
*Individual agencies can use other instruments as well, but all treatment decisions are
based on STATIC-99 scores
Purposes
Risk assessment score will be used to determine who gets priority for prison-based
treatment
Tools
*Legislation commissioned a 3-member board called State Authorized Risk
Assessment Tools for Sex Offenders (SARATSO), with representatives from the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of Mental Health, and the
Attorney General’s office to decide what tools to use
*Statute lays out criteria for adoption of risk assessment tools (must be validated,
cross-validated, and accepted across courts) and board is responsible for applying
criteria
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 38

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment

Probation
Parole

Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number

Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

• Treatment is available, but availability varies across the state
• Of the 58 California counties, only 31 have treatment available and only 8 use
polygraph tests
Yes
Males and females
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders
• At the county community level, courts and probation agencies decide who is
required to attend treatment
• At the state prison level, the STATIC-99 scores determine who is required to
attend treatment
• Offenders who score 4 or higher on the STATIC-99 are placed on high-risk sex
offender caseloads, and these offenders are eligible for treatment if they are
supervised in areas with treatment available
• California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) pays for highrisk sex offenders to enter treatment programs for 17 months—but 500-700 sex
offenders are released per month, so many do not get treatment
• New programming pending for up to 2,700 offenders on parole statewide
Treatment programs are developed by providers in conjunction with probation/parole
officers
• 3 levels of funding:
1) CDCR contracts with providers around the state that pay for high-risk parolees
2) Offenders on probation pay for treatment themselves
3) Providers are required to take on a certain percentage of indigent clients
(percentage unknown but varies by county)
• MediCAL does not help with court-mandated treatment
90,000 sex offenders in the state
12,000 sex offenders on probation (estimate)
10,000 sex offenders on parole (estimate)
2 sex offenders on community supervision post-release from Colinga (estimate)
• CDCR contracts with providers to treat approximately 2,700 sex offenders per
year
• 500-700 are released per month (very small percentage of parolees served)
7% of probationers
• 1-3% of parolees receive treatment with sex offender-specific therapist
• 2,700 slots for sex offenders that are with contracted sex offender therapists
• All others required to participate in parole outpatient counseling—2-3 hours per
month with providers that do not necessarily have training in sex offender
treatment
Not available
• Number of providers is not enough for the number of sex offenders who need
treatment
• Very few of the providers that are available specialize in sex offender treatment
• Only 3 counties have criteria for sex offender treatment providers (San Francisco,
San Diego, and Orange)—funded through Center for Sex Offender Management
(CSOM) grants
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
• No state standard for treatment
• Both the California Coalition for Sexual Offending and the Association for the
Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) support the use of empirically validated
approaches such as cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, etc. (not

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 39

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized

Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

chemical castration)
Drugs are sometimes administered, depending on client
Medications are all voluntary—specific drug choices made by doctors
Polygraphs used in 8 of 31 counties with treatment programs
Only 1 county has non-prosecution agreement
Individualized—there are currently no criteria for providers or certification
requirements for programs
• There are “model programs” that have been identified in the state, but their models
are not required
• Among the model programs are Sex Offender Rehabilitative Treatment Program
(SORT), but there is no standard defined
There is no prison treatment, although there is a proposal for such treatment
• CDCR contracts for a maximum of 17 months with providers
• This is determined by fiscal interests, not by treatment standards
• State (i.e. CDRC, probation) does not collect treatment data
• Individual providers do, but there has not been any analysis of provider data
Not available
Not available
Not available
One study underway using one county’s data, but still in early phases
•
•
•
•
•

REENTRY
Availability

Pre-release
Post-release

Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
•
•

Supervision
Service coordination

• No reentry programming in place right now
• Context: 200% prison capacity; jails overcrowded as well
• States contract with counties for jail funds—for counties to have access to jail
funds, must have reentry facility
• Goal is to have 500-bed facilities open across the state—these facilities would
serve all types of offenders, but sex offenders would be housed separately
• There are pre-release services
• In reality, they are not used very often
• STATIC-99 must be administered at 3 different points for sex offenders:
o First, during pre-sentence investigation
o Then again within 9 months of release from prison
o Finally, a third time right before discharge from parole
• Also developing a dynamic risk assessment instrument
Not available
No
• STATIC-99 administered to all sex offenders pre-release
• The use of this tool was mandated by legislation—if a sex offender scores 4 or
higher on assessment, then he/she becomes a candidate for high-risk sex offender
caseload (HRSO)
• Also screened for sexually violent predator (SVP) status via STATIC-99—if score
4 or higher and have mental disorder, then meet criteria for SVP (see dmh.ca.gov
for full list of criteria)
Not available
• No housing services provided in-house
• Upon release sex offender has 6 days to find compliant housing (or register as
transient/homeless)
Not available
If sex offender meets criteria for SVP then admitted to Coalinga State Hospital for
mental health issues
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 40

Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system

Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads

Provisions
Caseload

Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

Supervision under parole and probation (and conditional release program CONREP)
• Mandatory for all sex offenders at state level
• Most likely true at the county level as well (probation)—except for some
misdemeanor sex offenders who are placed on summary probation (no direct
contact)
No, but lifetime Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring option
•
•
•
•
•
•

7,000-8,000 sex offenders on probation, all supervised at county level (estimate)
11,000 on parole, 8,000 of which are active in the state of California (estimate)
County funds probation
State funds parole
STATIC-99 required
Other static tools used by individual agencies as well, but only STATIC-99 is
required
• Legislation passed in 11/2006 that required administration of STATIC-99
• In 11/2007 board voted again to keep it officially recognized
3 points described above
• STATIC-99:
1. High
2. Moderately high
3. Medium
4. Moderately low
5. Low
• Risk levels vary for other tools
Not available
• STATIC-99 used across agencies and also in civil commitment program
• Some counties have developed own customized tool
• If a county is large enough to warrant sex offender-specific caseloads, then most
counties have done that
• In rural areas, not enough sex offenders to warrant specialized caseloads
Hard to summarize probation because counties are independent
• Hard to summarize probation because counties are independent
• For parole, sex offenders will always be on minimum of high supervision (70:1)
o If on GPS, then 40:1
o If high risk sex offender (HRSO) at least 40:1
o If HRSO and GPS, then 20:1
• Nothing in statute requires additional certification for supervisors on probation or
parole, but there is specialized training from academy for parole officers
• Training requirements vary for probation officers depending on county
• Up to 3 years in probation (estimate)
• 3, 5 or 10 years for parole (depends on offense) (official numbers)
• Probation: treatment available in many counties, but in northern California may
have to travel to another county to get treatment
o Other services vary
• Parole: services vary—obtained through referrals
Discussion takes place between supervisors and service providers—more
communication about sex offenders than general offenders

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 41

Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Probation has basic recidivism data (includes all revocations and arrests—needs to
be broken down)
• Parole has LEADS database
Not available
Not available
None

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 42

Colorado Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard

Developed by whom?

Oversight by whom?

Funding

Eligibility

Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill

Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs

Prisons with programs available

Average capacity

• Only in 2-3 facilities (estimate)
• There may be a Spanish-speaking program in a prison as well
• Yes—standard covers both prison and community treatment—one part of the
standard specifically references prison-based treatment
• Go to www.dcj.state.co.us for standard—follow link for Sex Offender
Management Board (SOMB)
• Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB)—established in Department of
Criminal Justice (DCJ) via legislation in 1992
• SOMB charged to develop standards and guidelines for the evaluation, treatment,
and behavioral monitoring of sex offenders
• Required to write first version of standard by 1996
• Standard most recently updated in 2004
• Recently revised prison-based treatment section, should be reflected in 2008
• SOMB—also in charge of selecting providers
• Not directly in charge of structuring treatment programs, but all providers must
meet treatment standards that are in place, so indirectly influences programming
• State-funded through Department of Corrections (DOC)
• The recent increase in Colorado’s prison population has led to diversion of
resources away from sex offender services
• The state has developed a criminal justice commission that is charged with
introducing reforms to minimize prison growth
• Every sex offender eligible, but not everyone can get treatment when they want it
because there are limited slots available at a given time
• Offender must admit crime to participate in treatment
Not entirely sure, but because treatment is available for noncitizens in the community
it should be available for noncitizens in prison as well
Males and females
• Handled the same way as everyone else—treatment is a voluntary program, but if
an offender does not participate he/she does not get good time
• In addition to sex offender treatment provided at selected prisons, there is also a
separate mental health prison—mentally ill offenders must choose which type of
treatment is more important because they cannot be in both places at once
• Everyone is eligible but there is a waiting list that is prioritized by release date
• Treatment administered when an offender gets within a couple of years of release
date
1,171 sex offenders under lifetime imprisonment through June 30, 2007 (official
Department of Corrections number)
• 157 of 1,171 lifetime-imprisoned offenders (13.4%) in treatment as of 6/30/07
• 200-300 sex offenders total estimated to be in treatment (a really rough estimate)
Treatment programming divided into Phase I and Phase II
• Phase I is introduction to treatment programming
• Phase II is a therapeutic community model for advanced sex offender treatment
• 5 prisons (Fremont Correctional Facility, Sterling Correctional Facility, Youthful
Offender System, Colorado Territorial Correctional Facility, and Colorado
Women's Correctional Facility) have Phase I programming
• 2 of these prisons also offer Phase II, in addition to one other facility (Arrowhead
Correctional Facility, Colorado Women's Correctional Facility, and Youthful
Offender System)
• When fully staffed, 700 total

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 43

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
•

Drugs

• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment

Purposes

Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Right now working at half capacity due to staffing problems
100%
0%
• Standards dictate maximum ratio, which is: 1:8
• No group can exceed 12 sex offenders so absolute max is 2:12
Phase I: 8-12 months (4.6 in FY 07)
Phase II: 1 year (estimate) (7.6 in FY 07)
2 years prior to release (estimate)
Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, impulse control, psychoeducation,
gender role socialization, etc. (19 total--in Standards Section 3)
• On a case-by-case basis
• No chemical castration
Polygraph used
Individualization of treatment to each offender
Not required, but nonparticipation can have negative impact (i.e., required for release
onto lifetime supervision for offenders who would otherwise be incarcerated)
Not available
• Board has a standard—outlined in Section 4 of Standards (page 43)
• Part of standard dictates that a provider must have a certain number of clinical
hours in which to co-facilitate with an experienced provider before they are
allowed to facilitate on their own
• Risk and needs assessment conducted at intake in DOC; reassessed along the way
on supervision as well
• Assessment mainly for treatment purposes
• To place in treatment based on risk of sexual reoffense (to identify type of
treatment that is appropriate)
• Not specifically looking for high-risk though, etc.
• In standards—on page 23.
• Colorado does not have a customized tool
No current data from DOC but evaluation conducted in 2003
• Level of treatment completed, outcomes such as recidivism released to parole, etc.
• Sex offender crossover behavior—offending behavior, victim patterns, etc.
Case files manually entered into database
DOC has case files, database in Division of Criminal Justice
Study in 2003 looking at outcomes for Sex Offender Treatment Program (not been
updated since then)

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans

Funding

Population
Probation

Yes—more availability in the community than in prison
Not entirely sure, but because treatment is available for noncitizens in the community
it should be available for noncitizens in prison as well
Males and females
• Every sex offender eligible, but not everyone can get treatment when they want it
because there are limited slots available at a given time
• Offender must admit crime to participate in treatment
• Treatment provider is responsible for treatment
• Team (provider, supervising officer, polygraph officer) collaborates on decisions
about offenders (section 5 of standards—pg. 63)
• Offender-funded
• Funding in probation and parole that can be used when there is a need; also can be
used as an incentive if a district’s budget permits
• 2,088 adults (520 lifetime), 516 juveniles (official as of June 30, 2007)
• Numbers include both Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) and regular
supervision

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 44

Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation

Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Of 2,088 adult offenders, 1,026 are regular supervision, 1,062 are ISP
Not available
Not available
• Vast majority (it is required on community supervision) (estimate)
• Not required to be on treatment for duration of supervision (i.e. if long sentence,
do not have to be in treatment for all of it)
• Aftercare program in development
Not available
Not available
As of November 1, 2007, 179 treatment providers for adults
Majority of judicial districts, but only about half of the counties have treatment
providers
Probably none
Not available
Not available
Same as prison
• On a case-by-case basis
• No chemical castration
Polygraph used
Individualization of treatment to each offender
Yes—prison provider sends info on treatment progress to community provider
2.5-4 years
• Outcomes, recidivism, technical violators, etc.
• Demographic info in DOC
Electronically
Probation, but probably not DOC
None
REENTRY

Availability

Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services

• Most offenders do not come out into any sort of reentry program—most go onto
parole and some into community corrections, but aside from supervision there is
not a formal reentry initiative in place for sex offenders
• The state also uses a shared living arrangement program for sex offenders—
program is developed by providers and used by the state
• Offenders live together, but not with supervisor—this will be assigned on a caseby-case basis
• Circles of Support and Accountability model (COSA)—community volunteers
help provide support for sex offenders (program numbers are low though)
• COSA is a Canadian model developed in Mennonite Church
Case managers give offenders a list of resources but do not assist them with services
Not available
Not available
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision

Supervising agencies
Population

Yes—on probation, parole, and community corrections
Mandatory
Not applicable
• Yes
• Eligibility requirements described in Statute 18-1.3-1004 (indeterminate
sentencing); eligibility determined by offense type/classification
• Probation estimate: on June 30, 2007—1,066 on State Probation Specialized
Programs Sex Offender Intensive Supervision Program (SOISP)

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 45

Funding
Classification system

Year implemented/updated
Required for

Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes

Tools

Specialized caseloads

Provisions
Caseload

Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

•
•
•
•

1,026 on non-SOISP
State and local funding for probation
Parole funded by state
Assessment at time of sentencing to determine level of supervision (see statute for
risk classification)
• Also assessed for sexually violent predator (SVP) status
• Additionally, probation uses the Oregon sex offender risk assessment instrument
to classify people into supervision levels (minimum, medium, maximum within
each regular and ISP supervision); reassess every 6 months
Sexually Violent Predator statute enacted in 1999
• Supervision classification
• All sex offenders required to have pre-sentence investigation report (PSI) and risk
assessment at time of sentencing (release from prison)
1. Regular supervision
2. ISP
(All sex offenders on specialized caseloads though)
Also assessed for SVP status (based on risk assessment tool developed and validated
in Colorado)
Probationers—at sentencing; parolees assessed prior to release
• Risk assessment and treatment needs (e.g., assess if the person amenable to
treatment)
• Treatment progress as well (on probation, offenders reassessed every 6 months)
• Level of Service Inventory (LSI) and Oregon sex offender risk assessment for
probationers (Oregon tool has not been validated in Colorado)
• Providers use instruments listed in standards [pg 23]
• Yes—on probation and parole
• Probation has Sex Offender Intensive Supervision Program (SOISP) for felons
and lifetime supervision, as well as non-SOISP specialized caseloads
• GPS for some high-risk offenders
• SOISP program has three phases
• 25 cases per officer on SOISP
• Standard of 35 cases per officer on non-SOISP caseloads, but most caseloads are
much higher
• Officers required to get specialized training
• Two training programs for probation officers: Intro to Sex Offender Management
(24 hrs), Advanced Sex Offender Management training (72 hrs)
• Training involves sex offender-specific topics, defensive training, motivational
interviewing, cognitive overview, law and liability
• Varies based on sentence—sex offenders cannot be released early
• Can be up to 10 or more years
On probation, services available in the following areas: treatment, polygraphs,
housing, transportation dollars, emergency healthcare, clothing, food vouchers
Between supervision and treatment but not between supervision and other agencies
(i.e. no comprehensive discussions)
• Probation has aggregate data on intakes, pre-sentence investigations (PSI),
discharges, terminations, supervision level, revocation types, violation types, risk
level
• FY 2007: 1,013 adults and 204 juveniles had PSIs
• 15,440 total adult offenders received PSIs (7% for sex offenders)
• 2,640 total juvenile offenders received PSIs (8% for sex offenders)
Electronic probation data
Probation
9 year follow-up looking at violence and re-arrest as predicted by sex offender risk
scale—was predictive

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 46

Connecticut Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard

Developed by whom?

Oversight by whom?
Funding

Eligibility

Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill

Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
•

Drugs
o Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate
Provider certification

• Available in 6 facilities (including female and juvenile facilities)
• No specialized facilities for sex offenders, but these are facilities that house highrisk offenders (sex offenders are risk level 3 or higher)
• Implemented in 2000 by Sex Offender Policy and Advisory Committee (SOPAC)
• Sets out series of treatment standards that private providers must follow (stateemployed providers are exempt)
SOPAC includes representatives from sex offender treatment, Department of Mental
Health, Department of Children and Family Services, Judicial Department, Public
Defenders, Psychiatric Security Review Board, Office of Policy & Management,
Department of Mental Retardation, Sexual Abuse/Victim Advocacy (30-35 members
total)
Department of Correction (DOC) currently provides oversight, but the state is trying
to put a risk board in place
• State-funded, through DOC
• No private contractors—DOC contracts with state employees of University of
Connecticut Health Center for all treatment needs
• Because these are state employees they are not subject to treatment standards, but
they tend to follow them pretty closely
• Voluntary treatment—individual must acknowledge a problem sexual behavior
(no ABEL or polygraph) and have ability to function in a group (cognitively and
behaviorally)
• Eligibility determined in-house—not enough resources for everyone so have to
prioritize who gets treatment
Yes
Males and females
• Not required for mentally ill
• Those who are seriously mentally ill (Axis 1 disorders) go to White Inc Forensic
(on grounds of state hospital)
Not mandatory for all offenders (Supreme Court decision)
25% of prison population (estimate)
1% (estimate)
6
6 staff total
All except women’s program
0%
Not available
12 months, but varies greatly depending on where people are incarcerated and
severity of risk level
2+ years before release
• Group-based treatment, with family sessions as an ancillary component
• Cognitive-behavioral therapy, victim empathy, arousal control
• Provera and Lupron used, but more people on Prozac and other drugs
Not used in prison, but polygraphs used in community
Not required, but unlikely for someone to get parole if they do not go through
treatment
No certification requirements because prison treatment is administered by state

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 47

Assessment
Purposes

Assessments are administered at intake (nothing administered at completion of
treatment)
• STATIC-99, RRASOR, psychopathy checklist (PCL)
• Instruments have not been validated on Connecticut population

Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Demographic data used mainly for tracking purposes
Paper files
DOC
None
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment

Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers

Number

Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

• Available on probation and parole (both are state-level)
• Both use the same treatment provider (The Connection, Inc. Center for the
Treatment of Problem Sexual Behavior)
Yes—but hardly happens because they are being deported
Male and female
• All offenders released from prison or sentenced to probation are to be evaluated
by provider
• If provider determines that an offender does not need treatment, then he/she is
dismissed from the requirement (as decided by supervisor and provider)
Developed by provider
• Treatment on probation funded by Judicial Department
• Treatment on parole funded by Department of Correction, Department of Mental
Health, Department of Mental Retardation
1,600 on probation (estimate)
120 on parole (estimate)
Not applicable
• 85-90% go through treatment (estimate)
• Many complete treatment before supervision is done, so at any given time the
actual percentage in treatment will be lower
Not available
Not available
Not available
• State contracts with one group to administer treatment to probationers and
parolees (The Connection Inc, Center for the Treatment of Problem Sexual
Behavior [CTPSB])
• Contract has been in place for about 20 years.
• CTPSB employs a staff of 30 to do cognitive-behavioral treatment in community
• There are times when an offender receives treatment from another provider,
though. This usually happens under the following circumstances:
o Attorney cuts deal in court
o Risk level is too low to warrant using CTPSB resources
o Offender failed with CTPSB and court gave another chance
o CTPSB full in certain programming area
• 25 providers in-house
• 3 other programs statewide that see offenders (account for about 300 clients)
• Another dozen providers who do group treatment
Statewide (16 sites around state)
No waiting list—as numbers increase, size of program increases
Not applicable
72% (estimate)
• Group-based treatment
• Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, arousal control (through
medication), pro-social skill-building

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 48

Drugs
Truth tests

Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment

Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Programming based on risk level (low, medium, high, each with different
curriculum)
Yes
• Yes—polygraphs (sexual history, maintenance and monitoring, and instant
offense)
• CTPSB will work with clients up to 6 months regardless of whether or not they
deny the offense—they are terminated if fail instant offense test after 6 months
• Manualized within risk level but not done in workbook style
• Individual treatment plans completed
• Information sharing between prison and community supervision, but
programming is not continuous
• Part of the reason is that the majority of people who come from prison have not
had any treatment programming
Average of 3 years (estimate)
Not available
Electronic
• CTPSB
• Probation/Parole
Submit reports to funders but they are not available to the public
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services

Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Yes
Yes
• 100% of facilities have some type of reentry services—required by the state
• 9 facilities provide very specific reentry skills
• 6 facilities have job centers in conjunction with Department of Labor—where
offenders have access to jobs, develop resume, mock interviews, referrals
• Comprehensive statewide reentry plan – developed by State Office of Planning
and Management and Criminal Justice Policy Advisory Committee
• Overseen by State Office of Planning and Management
• Governing board: Criminal Justice Policy Advisory Committee (multi-agency
advisory)
Yes, but not residential
Everyone eligible under Offender Accountability Plan
Do not track by offense type
Do not track by offense type
No—reentry is voluntary
Not available
Not available
• Department of Correction (DOC)
• Probation
1.
2.

Board of Pardons and Parole (discretionary release for terms of greater than 2
years)
Commissioner of Corrections (for those with terms less than 2 years)

• Criteria: based on objective measurement (Salient Factor Score) and warden’s
decision (exercised on case-by-case basis)—done by contracted evaluation
services
• DOC does not include sex offenders in eligibility for discretionary release
• Risk assessment instruments are used pre- and post-release:
o Pre-release: STATIC 99, SOSP III (Sex Offender Screening Protocol –
adjusted actuarial)–give overall risk assessment (high moderate, low
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 49

moderate, low)
Post release: RRASOR, STATIC-99, VASOR, Screening for
Pedophilic Interest, VRAG, LSI-R
o For specific dynamic risk: Stable and ACUTE 2007, ABEL Assessment
of Sexual Interest, polygraph examinations
Reentry planning starts at intake
Individual programs usually begin 1 year or less before release
Transitional video workbook program (provides concrete reentry services, i.e.
where is the Department of Motor Vehicles, jobs, Social Security, benefits,
clothing, where to get licenses, etc)
Fingers in the Community–DOC Reentry Programs
o 8 facilities (700 offenders to date)–cognitive-behavioral therapy,
addiction services/relapse prevention, complete workgroup
Education Department–22 session reentry preparation program where offenders
go through mock interviews, practice filling out job applications online, learn how
to access schools in community, receive continuing education
o Complete workgroup and action plan
Correctional counselors for general reentry needs
Teams meet as well
o

Enrollment date
Services available

•
•
•
•
•

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
o Supervision
o Service coordination

Nonprofit involvement
•
•

Faith-based
Role

Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

•
•

Special management units (8 parole officers statewide)
Not available
• Once individual has been released to community, correctional counselors have no
further obligation
• Parole officer gets parole summary and packet of information
• Post-release supervisors also coordinate post-release services
• Nonprofit agencies serve as primary evaluation and treatment specialists
• Involved in all reentry services
10% (estimate)
Provide housing services, outpatient treatment, anger management, mental health
services, mentoring
• Sex offenders have access to all non-residential programs that are available to
other offenders (employment, drug/alcohol)
• Some restrictions for residential/half-way houses
None
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Criteria for decisions

Probation and Parole are both state-level functions
• Not mandatory for sex offenders
• 2 sentences to community supervision:
1) Straight suspended sentence—for example, 10 years execution
suspended 10 years probation. The offender is sentenced directly to
probation, but if at any time during his probation the court determines
that a violation has occurred, the offender can be sent to a correctional
facility and serve the original 10 years
2) Split-sentence Policy—for example, 10 years execution suspended after
5 years and 10 years probation. The offender serves 5 years in a
correctional facility and then starts his 10 year probation period. If at
any time during his probation, the court determines that a violation has
occurred, the offender can be sent back to the correctional facility to
complete the remaining 5 years that were originally suspended
Judicial decisions

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 50

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies

Population

Funding
Classification system

Year implemented/updated

Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Caseload
Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

No, but there is a 35-year probation for 8-9 statutory offenses (including sexual
assault in 1st degree, risk of injury to minor, etc)
• Probation and Parole
• Also Special Parole—if an offender is sentenced to special parole they can only
serve a maximum of 5 years, including time spent in prison for violations, etc.
(i.e. time does not stop at any point)
• Cannot have Special Parole and probation at the same time for the same charge
• Probation: 1,162 high/medium risk sex offenders as of January 1, 2008 (official
estimate from CMIS)
• Parole: 150 (estimate)
• DOC for parole
• Judicial for probation
• Classification into risk levels using static and dynamic scores (University of
Connecticut Health uses STATIC-99 and RRASOR; probation officers use LSIR)
• Offenders reassessed every 3 months using dynamic and acute actuarial scores
• First implemented in 1995
• Updated in 2005
• In process of being updated again
All sex offenders
High, medium
• Risk/needs classification
• Determination of treatment and supervision protocol
In both probation and parole
• Smaller caseloads
• Collaboration between victim’s advocate, probation officers, and treatment
providers
• By statute, judge can impose electronic monitoring, GPS
• 40 on probation (estimate)
• 20 on parole (estimate)
• At least 2 years experience preferred (if not then team up with more experienced
supervisor)
• Bachelor’s of Science degree
• Probation officers sit in on treatment groups as regularly as possible
• Officers participate in specialized training (32 hours initial)
• 10 years for probation
• Parole varies depending on how much time is owed
• Same services that are available to general population, plus weekly specialized
sex offender counseling
• Treatment includes rehabilitation and reasoning (taking responsibility for actions)
• AIC programs help with job placement, vocational training, substance programs
Yes—most offices have one team meeting per month (group meeting between all
officers and all treatment providers, along with victim advocates, to go through all
cases)
• CMIS system
• If individual is on sex offender registry with conviction in past ten years, can be
classified as a sex offender
Electronic
Probation data maintained by Court Support Services Division (CSSD)
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 51

Delaware Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard

Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
o Drugs
o Truth tests
o Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Treatment only in 1 prison (Delaware Correctional Center) out of 4 in the state (1
women’s facility, 3 men’s facilities)
• State just passed legislation to create Sex Department of Correction (DOC) might
have Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB), and part of that legislation
requires the development of standards across prison and community—not in
existence yet
Legislation passed at end of 2007
DOC oversees prison treatment to date, but SOMB will take it over in the future
Stated funded through DOC
Available for all sex offenders, but due to lack of resources/space not everyone gets it
Probably
Males
Eligible for the same types of treatment as other sex offenders
Not applicable
661 as of April 21, 2008
Not available
1
300
Usually a waiting list of 100
0%
1:150
24 months
Usually begin treatment within 2 years of release date—ideally is 6 months prior to
release
Cognitive-behavioral therapy
Not used unless individual is involved in mental health treatment (diagnosed through
mental health board)
Probably not
Mixture
No—unless structured this way by sentencing order
Not available
• None currently, but there will be once a SOMB is established
• Correctional counselors administer treatment in prisons
For risk more than needs, but just submitted grant to Bureau of Justice Assistance for
needs assessment
• LSI-R (in community corrections too)
• In process of validating it
Yes—DACS system
Demographic data, program completion
Electronic
DOC
No evaluations on sex offender treatment, just substance abuse

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender

Available through private providers, but limited availability
Probably
Males and females

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 52

Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not mandatory right now, but may become mandatory under new legislation
Developed by provider
Offender fees
• Probation and Parole are consolidated
• 839 as of December 2007 (estimate)
As above
As above
Not applicable
28% as of December 2007 (estimate)
As above
As above
Not applicable
1 private contractor with multiple offices
Statewide
Not available
Not available
Not available
Cognitive-behavioral therapy
Not used as part of sex offender treatment—but some offenders may go to private
providers on their own, and these providers may use drugs
Polygraph used
Mixture but more individualized
Probably not
Varies
Can track those that go to treatment, but only private providers have specifics on
treatment program
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release

Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date

• No reentry initiative, but there are pre-release programs
• Offenders may or may not see a counselor
• No needs assessment
• Reentry subcommittee looks at points in system where improvements are needed
• 500 total served in a year (estimate)
No
100%
No—but sex offenders have access to general pre-release services described below
Not available
All sex offenders are eligible for pre-release services
Not applicable
No, but there are policies within the Department of Correction (DOC)
Not applicable
Not applicable
State-funded through DOC
• Delaware has truth-in-sentencing—offenders serve 85% of sentence (recalculated
for good time)
• Parole Board is the authority for cases that came before truth-in-sentencing
• Varies by prison, but generally services begin when an offender has 2 years or

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 53

Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
o Supervision
o Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement

o

Faith-based
• Role

Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

less left in sentence
• Try to begin as close to release date as possible
• Life skills, anger management, cognitive-behavioral therapy, father readiness,
career readiness, budgeting, decision-making strategies
• Specific services vary across prisons
None
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
• There are a number of local nonprofits that do post-release reentry services—most
do not work directly with sex offender but a few do (under 10 slots available for
sex offenders across the state)
• Nonprofits do not coordinate with state officials in service delivery
The only nonprofits that serve sex offenders are faith-based
• Case management—help offenders find housing, employment, etc.
• Mentoring/support
• Transportation services
Services are available for 6 months to 1 year
Not available
Not available
• DOC has data on individuals in pre-release programming
• Nonprofits maintain info on post-release services
None—some nonprofits do their own research, but none on sex offenders
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Yes—under consolidated probation and parole
• Not mandatory for sex offenders, depends on sentence
• Most sex offenders are required to be supervised in the community
Judicial decision under sentencing guidelines
No
Not available
State-funded through DOC
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
To assess risk
LSI-R
Yes
• Just passed legislation to put sex offenders on GPS
• In addition to standard conditions of supervision, sex offenders may be subject to
the following:
1. Participate in sex offender assessment, evaluation, and treatment as
determined by the Department of Correction. The offenders will be
financially responsible for all examinations and treatment unless the
Department of Correction finds the offender is financially unable to pay
2. Prohibit access or possession of sexually explicit and/or obscene material
unless approved by the Probation Officer
3. Comply with all statutory requirements imposed upon individuals convicted
of a sex offense including but not limited to compliance with 11 Del. Code
Section 8510 requiring the submission of photographs, fingerprints and
identification, sex offender registration (11 Del. Code Section 4120),

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 54

Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

community notification (11 Del. Code Section 4121), and DNA collection
(29 Del. Code Section 4713) and limitations regarding contact with school
zones (11 Del. Code Section 1112)
4. Prohibit contact or residing with children under the age of 18 unless
approved by the Probation Officer
5. Prohibit access, possession or control over or use of a computer device,
modem or network interface device. Any device or storage medium of an
offender whose use has been approved by the Department of Correction is
subject to random examination by the Probation Officer to determine
compliance with this requirement. Using a computer modem or network
interface device for any purpose which might further sexual activity is
strictly prohibited. If violation of this provision is found, the Department of
Correction may seize the computer, related equipment and storage devices
6. To require submission to polygraph testing to assist in the treatment and
supervision of the offender. The failure of a polygraph test alone may not
be a basis to violate the offender’s probation
7. Require no contact with the victim of the crime unless otherwise approved
by the Probation Officer
25 (estimate)
Specialized training through the Center for Sex Offender Management
Varies by individual depending on sentence handed down
• Nonprofits provide most services
• Sex offenders have access to services for general offender population such as
education, vocational trainings, etc.—but there is nothing specifically geared
toward sex offenders
• Housing services are more difficult to provide because sex offenders are not
eligible for Section 8 housing
• Depends on probation officer
• Not much collaboration with service providers, but goal of SOMB is to tighten
relations
Demographics
Electronically
Probation-- Supervisor of sex offender unit keeps data on clients
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 55

Florida Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
• No formally sanctioned sex offender treatment in prison
• There is some informal treatment in prison, but very limited – some clinicians
may do informal treatment

Availability

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Males and females
Mandatory for those with specified sex offenses: Lewd or Lascivious Offenses
committed upon or in the presence of persons less than 16 years of age; Sexual
Performance by a child; Selling or Buying of Minors (according to 948.30)
By private treatment providers
Individual
1,076
Not available
142 on Community Control
60 programs
Statewide
0%
0%
Not available
• Most programs are cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, arousal
reconditioning, victim empathy, cognitive behavioral therapy to lower negative
mood states, relationships
• Above varies because there is no standard. Legislation 948.30 required qualified
practitioner to provide treatment for sex offenders
• People are urged to go to programs where therapists are members of Association
for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA)
Yes—anti-androgen law enacted in 1997 (Chemical Castration law 1997), but
probably very rarely used
Yes—standard condition for sex offender probation
Individualized
Not applicable (no prison-based treatment)
2.5 years
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility

Yes
Yes
Not available
Serious and Violent Reentry Initiative
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 56

Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date

Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Anybody released from prison is eligible
Not available
Not available
State Department of Corrections
• Florida Parole Commissions
• Based on sentencing guidelines, which are determined upon sentencing
(determines release date)
Upon entry to prison (discharge planning, education, vocational training, counseling
on attitudes about supervision—currently pilot program to bring this to county jail—
and education about conditions)
Not available
Sex offenders have specialized probation officers
Professional correctional specialists
• Not same as prison case manager
• Information exchanged on as-needed basis, but this probably very rarely happens
• Link in prison is classification officer
Not available
Yes, but not for sex offenders
Not available
Nonprofits offer full continuum of services: residential, outpatient counseling, food
banks, employment assistance, etc.
Not available
Yes
Entire status: employment, treatment, housing, etc
Electronic
Department of Corrections
Yes
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration

Yes
Not everyone is eligible
• Anybody who meets criteria as sexual offender or sexual predator and placed on
community supervision on sex offense gets these conditions
• Court/judge determines
No
State
Risk classification based solely on conviction
Not available
All
Sexual predator (for those convicted of 1st degree or 2 separate 2nd degree) and sex
offender
Mental health evaluation, assessment of risk
Risk assessment
Not available
Yes
Senior staff, specialized training
Up to 20 per officer
Not available
Varies—most from 5 to 15 years
No formal services—up to offender and probation/parole officer to link with state
programs for employment, etc.
• No case manager, just parole/probation officer
• Up to their discretion how much case management activity they do

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 57

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Frequent contact with therapist, etc.
Yes
Not available
Electronic
Department of Corrections
Yes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 58

Georgia Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Males and females
Sentencing judges decide during the sentencing if the special condition of sex
offender treatment will be imposed
Sentencing judges decide during the sentencing, but treatment providers also make
the determination if left to them by the judges
Offender-funded
6,022 (official)
Not available
Not applicable
72.7% (official, poll of the field)
Not available
Not applicable
34
Statewide
0%
Not available
Not available
Denial, sexual arousal control, cognitive restructuring, relapse prevention, knowledge
and skill, family and other social support network, empathy enhancement,
interpersonal skills training, emotional management, contact with children, family
reunification and visitation
Chemical castration, if ordered by judge
Polygraphs
Both—treatment providers have to follow minimum guidelines but they are allowed
flexibility within those minimum guidelines
Not applicable (no prison-based treatment)
Not available
None collected
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility

Yes
Yes
100% (official, scorecard, data warehouse)
• National Institute of Correction’s Transition from Prison to the Community
Initiative (http://www.nicic.org/TPCGeorgia)
• Fatherhood Initiative
• Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI)
• Georgia Reentry Impact Project (GRIP)
No
• All offenders are eligible for reentry services
• Certain initiatives exclude sex offenders

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 59

Population

• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• 118 in the Reentry Skills-Building Program
• 59 in In House Transitional Centers
• 2 in Transitional Centers
• All of above are official numbers, DOC database
Not available
Not available
No, but currently developing Standard Operation Procedures for Reentry
Not applicable
Operation, Planning and Development Division
• State Board of Pardons and Paroles
• Criteria: nature of offense, past criminal history, victim statements, pre-sentence
investigations
At intake
• In-house transition centers, building cognitive skills, vocational education, and
substance abuse treatment, PIE (prison industry enhancement) programs—job
skills training (http://www.nicic.org/TPCGeorgia), support and services to fathers
• Drug treatment, sex offender treatment referrals
• Counselors are assigned to inmates upon entry to a facility
• When on probation/parole, a specialized officer is assigned
• Not same case manager as in prison
• After they are released they are assigned to a specialized probation/parole officer
who has been trained in the offender’s needs
Not available
Parole/probation officer refers treatment that meets specific needs
Yes
50% (estimate)
No-cost or reduced fees for treatment, residential, food and job assistance.
• State and local agencies and community service providers offer assistance with
employment, housing and other needs
• Services available at least through probation/parole
Class and program completion
Offender tracking system
Department of Corrections
Yes
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision

Supervising agencies

Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated

Yes
• Not mandatory
• Determined by State Law or Judges Order
Community supervision is determined by the sentencing judge or the Georgia
Board of Pardons and Parole
Yes, offenders may receive lifetime supervision for the following offenses:
Kidnapping (when victim is under 14), Rape, Aggravated Sodomy, Aggravated Child
Molestation, Aggravated Sexual Battery
Sex offenders on probation are supervised by Specialized Supervision Officers who
only deal with sex offenders and receive training on the supervision of those
offenders
• 6,022 on probation (official)
• Number not available for parole
State
Yes
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 60

Required for

Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload

Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• All offenders required by law to register.
• All cases that were originally charged with an offense required to register by
O.C.G.A. 42-1-12, but were reduced to a non-registerable offense
• Any offender sentenced for an offense required by O.C.G.A. 42-1-12 to register,
but is not required to register due to date of conviction (or FOA status)
• All cases court-ordered to attend sex offender treatment and/or undergo a sex
offender evaluation
Standard, Medium, High, Max
Yes
To determine the offender’s propensity to re-offend
STATIC-99
Yes
Reduced caseload and contacts, additional special conditions
• Based on contacts
• Officer can not exceed 160 total contacts per month
• Contacts include face to face contacts, collateral contacts (someone other than the
offender, treatment providers, family, other law enforcement)
Basic Sex Offender Management Training (new officers), annual Sex Offender
Management Training
Not available
Sex Offender Treatment, Georgia Department of Labor
• Yes, they are given points of contact with each respective Sheriff’s Office
• Department also partners with all levels of law enforcement (i.e. Georgia
Department of Family and Children’s Services)
Total number of offenders, types of offenses, revocations
SCRIBE – Department’s database
Georgia Department of Correction’s Office of Planning and Analysis
Study on child sex offenders

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 61

Idaho Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration

Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Data and Research
Type

Pre-treatment is available in some of the medium custody facilities
Yes
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) providers
Department of Corrections (DOC)
State-funded through the Department of Corrections
All sex offenders are eligible
Are eligible as long as there is no Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) hold
Males only
• Mentally ill offenders are eligible for treatment
• May be excluded as a result of a psychological evaluation
• Must be within 1 year of parole hearing date
• Must agree to a degree of the offense (i.e. take responsibility)
• Must have a psychological evaluation
• Must agree to treatment
1,346 (official DOC number)
• 19% of sex offenders are in institutional programs and education
• 8% of sex offenders are in sex offender-specific treatment/cognitive self-change
programs
3 of 6 prisons have some treatment available
12-15 beds
100% (estimate)
0% (estimate)
1:12 (estimate)
• Sex Offender Treatment Phase I: 8 months
• Moral Recognition Therapy: 26 weeks
• Cognitive Self-Change Phase I: Not available
6-12 months prior to release (official DOC)
Cognitive behavioral therapy
No
Polygraph used
Blend
Not required
85% (official DOC)
• ATS-certified
• Master’s level psychology or social work degree
• State license
• 20 Continuing Education Units per year
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

To define risks and needs
Treatability
Psychological Assessments
Personal Inventory
MnSOST
Static-99
LSI-R

Some data is collected but the type was not specified

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 62

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Central Integrated System
DOC
No
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment

Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Males and females
• Sentencing Authority makes decisions about treatment
• If the Sentencing Authority decrees that someone is not supervised as a sex
offender, then he/she is not eligible for treatment
• DOC
• Treatment providers
• Offender-funded
• Some grant money available
728 (official)
260 (official)
Not applicable
Numbers are not available for all districts – the numbers below apply to the Boise
area (District 4) which manages one-third of all sex offenders on community
supervision
94%
94%
Not applicable
12 (estimate)
All 7 districts have providers
0%
0% (estimate)
Not available
Some medical management
Polygraph used
Blend
• It depends on a variety of factors
• Some start over while some have to go back to the beginning
• 2.5 years
• Aftercare is ongoing (in District 4, lasts for the entire supervision period)
Some data is collected but the type was not specified
Central Integrated System
DOC
No
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming

Yes
Yes
Not available
• Nothing specifically for sex offenders
• Reentry plays a small role in the work of the Idaho Criminal Justice Council, a
group put together by the Governor’s Office
• The legislature recently committed $4.5 million to work on reentry substance
abuse issues
Yes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 63

Eligibility
Population
•

Pre-release

•

Post-release

State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding

Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management

Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
•

Role

Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

•
•
•
•

All sex offenders are eligible
Services are not mandatory
19% of sex offenders are in institutional programs and education
8% of sex offenders are in sex offender-specific treatment/cognitive self-change
programs
• 24% are in internal programs
• External programs are not included so the total number who participate in reentry
programs is likely higher
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
• Grant programs
• State (very little)
• Offenders
• Providers
• Parole Commission
• Criteria: time served, behavior, treatment attended
• Parole Commission does not use assessment tools but will look at the results of
assessments done by DOC
6 months to 1 year (official)
• Sex Offender Treatment Phase – pre-treatment
• Pre-release Classes
• Polygraph
• Each offender is assigned a manager upon entry to the prison
• The case worker usually changes as they move from facility to facility
• Many are social workers, but they do not have to be licensed
• There are no case workers specific to sex offenders
Not the same case manager as in prison
Sex Offender Specialized Caseload Officers (probation and parole officers)
File sharing, internal data sharing, and communication including by email about
cases
Yes
• A small percentage of nonprofits are faith-based
• There is one organization based in Boise that plays an important role
• Generally they oversee their own programs
• Mainly offer help with housing (shelters and homes), clothing, job training etc.
• Vocational rehabilitation
• Drug and alcohol treatment
• Cognitive core programming
• Transitional funds for housing
• Assistance with polygraph
• Anything else that offenders are eligible for as long as it doesn’t violate anything
in their sex offender agreement
Some data is collected but the type was not specified
Central Integrated System
DOC
No
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Yes
Not mandatory

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 64

Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding

Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload

Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length

Services

Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Whether they are released to parole or because time expired
• Although rare, Judge may not order sex offender treatment
• Determined by court or Parole Commission
Yes, for those receiving life sentences
Probation and Parole
Probation: 728 (official)
Parole: 260 (official)
• Offenders (through cost of supervision)
• State
• Some Grant Programs
Yes
Modified in February 2007
All offenders
Levels 1, 2, and 3 (with 3 being the highest)
Yes
• Risk, needs, and treatability
• LSI-R
• RRASOR
• STATIC-99
• Treatment and Progress Scale (TPS)
Yes
Additional Training – higher standards
• 40-75 (estimate)
• If the supervising officer is new, the numbers will be kept lower
• Number depends on the risk levels of the offenders supervised
20 hours of special sex offender training annually in addition to the 40 hours all
officers are required to complete
• Between FY2000 and 2007, there were 1,278 sex offenders released from felony
probation: 51% completed supervision and were discharged, spending an average
of 64 months on supervision prior to discharge; 19% failed and were sent to
retained jurisdiction (intermediate program lasting 120 days); 30% were revoked
and sent to prison
• Between FY2000 and 2007, there were 661 sex offenders released from felony
probation: 34% completed supervision and were discharged, spending an average
of 45 months on supervision prior to discharge; 66% violated parole and were
committed to parole violator status by Board (63% of these were revoked and the
remaining reinstated)
• Vocational rehabilitation
• Drug and alcohol treatment
• Cognitive core programming
• Transitional funds for housing
• Assistance with polygraph
• Anything else that offenders are eligible for as long as it does not violate anything
in their sex offender agreement
Frequent collaboration
Some data is collected but the type was not specified
Central Integrated System
DOC
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 65

Illinois Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?

Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender

Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders

Average duration

Enrollment date
Content
•

Drugs

•
•

Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized

Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

• In 7 facilities throughout the state
• There are no specialized sex offender facilities; however, approximately 75% of the
inmates at Big Muddy Correctional Facility are sex offenders. This facility also
houses offenders who have been civilly committed as Sexually Dangerous
Yes, the Illinois Sex Offender Management Board produces the standards
Sex Offender Management Board developed all the standards and are based on the
Colorado Sex Offender Management Board and Association for Treatment of Sexual
Abusers (ATSA) standards
Sex Offender Management Board
State funded
• Every sex offender is eligible for treatment if they want it
• Participation in treatment is voluntary
Yes
• Males and females
• Since there are a low number of female sex offenders, females mainly participate in
individual treatment
Handled the same way as everyone else—treatment is a voluntary program so mentally
ill sex offenders are not required to receive treatment
Must admit or partially admit to sex offense in order to be eligible to receive treatment
6,800 sex offenders in prison (estimate)
3% in treatment (estimate)
• 7 prisons (names of all prisons not specified)
• Varies from program to program
• At Big Muddy River Correctional Facility the capacity is 93 sex offenders
• At Graham Correctional Center the capacity is 50 offenders
• The other 5 facilities have about 10 slots available at each site
Almost all programs have waiting lists
0%
• No more than 10-12 individuals should participate in a group treatment session
• Sometimes there is one provider and some groups have co-therapists
• The group size should not exceed 12 regardless of the number of therapists
o In the two larger programs listed above, treatment typically lasts for 2 years
(estimate)
o The treatment duration at the five smaller programs varies
In the two larger programs listed above, treatment begins approximately 2 years prior
to an offender’s release and usually no more than five years prior to the release date
Cognitive behavioral therapy, arousal control techniques, relapse prevention, victim
empathy, and psychoeducation programs
Not administered in prison-based treatment, but are sometimes administered in the
state’s civil commitment program
No
Follows a basic manualized model, but treatment providers tailor the treatment to make
it specific to the offender’s needs and crime
Not required for release because treatment is completely voluntary
Not available
• The Illinois Sex Offender Management Board sets the standards for treatment
providers
• In order to be approved to provide sex offender treatment, an applicant must: a) hold

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 66

a bachelor’s degree or higher in social work, psychology, marriage and family
therapy, counseling, psychiatry, or other coursework within which degree the
applicant can verify successful completion of coursework in assessment, social
problems, abnormal psychology, counseling skills, or similar therapeutic discipline;
b) have 400 hours of supervised experience in the treatment of sex offenders in the
last 4 years, at least 200 of which are face-to-face therapy with sex offenders; and c)
have at least 40 hours documented training in the specialty of sex offender
assessment/treatment/management
Offenders assessed for treatment needs
• To understand an offender’s offense history, readiness for treatment, cognitive
abilities and risk factors
• The Department of Corrections also conducts pre-release evaluations—this
evaluation looks at how successful a parolee would be on supervision (e.g., is there
family support, does the offender have a place to live, etc.)
• The pre-release report incorporates both static and dynamic factors of the offender
• STATIC-99, MnSOST-R
• There is also an Illinois-specific assessment
Collect data on which offenders return to prison on violations and victims violations
Not available
Not available
Not available
No evaluations have been conducted

Assessment
Purposes

Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on parole)
Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans

Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole

Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots

• Yes, there are two offices where the Illinois Department of Corrections provides sex
offender treatment—one in Chicago and one in East St. Louis—these programs are
funded by the Illinois Department of Corrections
• The state also has a contractual program in Carbondale
• The state does not have programs in other areas—offenders who live in other areas
have to go to private treatment providers
Yes, for those who are not deported
Males and females
Not available
• Treatment providers make decisions about individualized treatment plans—whether
it be a state or privately funded program
• The parole agent and the treatment provider work together within a containment
model to create the treatment plan
Combination of state and private funding
Not applicable
1,100 (estimate)
Not applicable
Not applicable
• 85% in treatment
• The 15% who are not in treatment either have some intense levels of mental illness
that prevent them from being able to participate in treatment or may have just been
released from prison and have yet to be evaluated for treatment
• Also, some areas of the state (remote and rural) do not have qualified treatment
providers to conduct sex offender-specific therapy
Not applicable
400 (estimate)
Located throughout the state
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 67

Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment

Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
• Similar to in-prison treatment
• Community-based treatment also includes some adjunct family therapy and
individual counseling if appropriate
Not available
Polygraphs are administered
Same as in-prison treatment (combination of individualized and manualized plans)
• There is an effort to coordinate treatment as offenders transition into the community
• Offenders sign a release for therapists to provide information about their treatment to
the parole department and to community treatment providers
2 years (estimate)
Minimal data is collected by the Illinois Department of Corrections because a majority
of the offenders are in private programs
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (refers to parole)

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision

Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Caseload
Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration

Data and Research
Type
Storage

Yes
Mandatory
Not available
• For offenders convicted of Predatory Criminal Sexual Assault, Aggravated Criminal
Sexual Assault, and Criminal Sexual Assault and were convicted on or after
December 13, 2005
• The Prisoner Review Board decides on length of parole for these offenders and it can
range from 3 years to life
See above for parole
State-funded
Community treatment providers conduct an assessment when an offender enrolls in
treatment
To assess level of risk, need for treatment, level of service provided
Varies by provider
Yes
Offenders on specialized caseloads have very specific conditions of parole including
electronic detention, Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring, residency
restrictions, and strict provisions for contact with children
20 cases per officer on average
• Officers required to participate in 80 hours of training on sex offender supervision
• Provides information on sex offender treatment, community sex offender
management strategies, legislation specific to sex offenders, surveillance, victim
issues, etc.
• Ongoing training is provided after the 80 hours
• Duration of parole
• Generally 1-3 years, but can extend to lifetime as indicated above
Not available
• Supervisors work with treatment staff as a part of the department’s containment team
model
• The department tries to get as many people involved to provide wraparound services
for offenders
• Maintain data on recidivism
• Do not collect any data at the individual level
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 68

Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 69

Indiana Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill

Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration

Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

• Treatment is available in three correctional facilities: Plainfield Correctional
Facility, Miami Correctional Facility, Rockville Correctional Facility (female
facility)
• All services are provided by Liberty Behavioral Health (LBH)—private contractor
that has been providing services to sex offenders since 1999
• Liberty contract covers prison-based and community-based treatment (continuous
program)
• Other offenders have access to treatment as well, but not in main group program
Liberty Behavioral Health has a list of performance indicators in contract with state
Liberty Behavioral Health
Department of Corrections (DOC)
State-funded through DOC
Available to all sex offenders
Yes (even those not in the country legally)
Males and females
• Dealt with on an individual basis
• If mental illness precludes an individual from receiving treatment, then he/she
does not receive it
• All others are eligible
• Prison-based treatment is mandated by statute: offenders who refuse to
participate could receive a discipline report and hearing
• If offender is found at hearing to be in violation of disciplinary code, and
continues to refuse treatment, he/she could lose earned credit time and have
restrictions on visitation
4,000 (estimate)
• At any given time, there are 1,000 in treatment at Plainfield, but only 100 in
treatment at Miami
• Long-term plan is to implement the new program in both prisons so that both can
accommodate 1,000 patients at a time
• Everyone is seen in some capacity before they are released, but not intensively at
one facility
3 (2 male, 1 female)
Not available
Not available
Not available
Each provider has group of about 10 offenders (estimate)
• 2 months (18 hours per week)
• Over the next year, when everyone in facilities gets treatment, duration will be
length of stay
Varies—sometimes right before release
Cognitive-behavioral therapy with relapse prevention, arousal management,
interpersonal skills, psychoeducational component
No
Polygraph
Manualized within risk groups (i.e. low risk gets less treatment than high risk)
No
Not available
• 2 levels of providers:

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 70

1.
2.

Counselor 1: must be licensed as a mental health provider
Counselor 2: not required to be licensed, but must have degree in social
work/psychology or sex offender treatment experience

• Counselor 1 works with higher risk offenders
• Counselor 2 conducts psychoeducation groups and process groups
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Risk assessment and other treatment needs
• STATIC-99 used for risk assessment
• MSI-II, psychological inventory of criminal thinking styles (PICS) conducted at
intake for treatment needs
• STABLE occasionally used for risk assessment
• STABLE and STATIC actuarial
• PICS and MSI have been validated

Data and Research
Type

• LBH has utilization data (i.e. individual is in treatment, individual refused
treatment), but not much data on progress
• No demographic data (although DOC probably keeps that)
Paper and electronic
• Liberty Health
• Sometimes in department databases
• DOC maintains some records
Recidivism data on men released into community-based treatment

Storage
Maintenance

Evaluation

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on parole)
Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration

• Liberty Behavioral Health contracts with the DOC to provide prison and
community-based treatment to sex offenders—community treatment is consistent
with the parameters of prison treatment
• Mandatory for all sex offenders on parole
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
State funded through DOC
Not available
Currently 700 parolees (estimate)
Not applicable
Not available
98% (estimate)
Not applicable
Liberty Behavioral Health subcontracts with providers across the state, who go
through credential process to ensure that they meet treatment standards
45-50 (estimate)
Statewide
0%
Not available
Not available
Cognitive-behavioral therapy with relapse prevention, arousal management,
interpersonal skills, psychoeducational component
No
Polygraph
Manualized within risk groups (i.e. low risk gets less treatment than high risk)
Not available
Treatment lasts as long as supervision

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 71

Data and Research

Type
Storage

Maintenance
Evaluation

• LBH has utilization data (i.e. individual is in treatment, individual refused
treatment), but not much data on progress
• No demographic data (although DOC probably keeps that)
Paper and electronic
• Liberty Health
• Sometimes in department databases
• DOC maintains some records
Recidivism data on men released into community-based treatment
Annual recidivism study examines how many parolees violate or recidivate with new
sex crime
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming

Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
•

Post-release

State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria
Enrollment date
Services available
Case management

Post-release services
Case management
o Supervision

• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Yes
Yes—Community Transition Program, Work Release, Community Corrections,
Parole and Probation Supervision
100% (official statistic, from pre-release reentry programs)
Transition From Prison to Community Initiative (TPCI)
• Yes—sex offender treatment is mandated and if sex offender refuses then
disciplinary action is taken
• As part of treatment, offender is required to plan for release—this includes
education on residence restriction and registration responsibilities
Participation is required for all sex offenders
500 sex offenders within 6 months of release (estimate from Indiana Department of
Corrections Planning Division)
725 sex offenders under parole eligible for post-release (estimate from Indiana
Department of Corrections Planning Division)
Yes
Department of Corrections Policy and Statute
Director of Reentry and the Indiana Department of Corrections (IDOC) Executive
Staff
State funded, majority comes through IDOC budget
• Indiana Department of Corrections—based on state statute
• STATIC-99 is risk indicator
Evaluations and assessments begin at intake
Education, placement planning, sex offender-specific treatment
• Case managers are IDOC employees that are members of the Unit Team Offender
Management system used by IDOC
• Assigned upon arrival in correctional facility
Not available
• Parole supervision provided by IDOC, while probation and community
corrections provided by courts
• Different case managers than those assigned in prison, but unit team will hand off
to community supervision team when offender is released to supervision
• Parole supervision and containment team (treatment) have access to reentry
accountability plan and treatment summary report
Post-release supervisors also coordinate services
Limited participation
Not available
Not available
• Treatment, polygraph, financial assistance, referral services for employment,
housing assistance, medical services, mental health services
• While on parole, the offender will be monitored by the containment team, and as

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 72

the offender becomes stable and adjusted in the community fewer services are
needed
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (Refers to Parole)
Availability
Eligibility

Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Caseload

Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type

Storage

Yes
• Not mandatory for sex offenders to be on parole—function of the sentence
imposed by the court
• If an offender comes to the DOC with suspended time that offender may not be on
parole—due to the probation sentence (suspended time)
• If an offender is given a straight executed sentence then he comes to parole—this
is the majority of cases
• If certain types of sex offenders are released onto parole, they must be supervised
in a specialized Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP—see below)
• If sex offender is released onto parole for one of the following crimes, must be
supervised in SOMP: Rape, Criminal Deviant Conduct, Molesting, Exploitation,
Pornography, Sexual Battery, Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, Incest, Public
Indecency, Prostitution with a Minor, Failure to Register as a Sex Offender (this
list is not exhaustive)
• In addition, if released onto parole for non-sexual offense but have history of one
of the above offenses, placed on SOMP
• If sex offender maxes out in prison, not required to be on post-release supervision
Yes—but brand new and only one person on it
Parole
Not available
State
Yes
Not available
All sex offenders released onto parole
Low, medium, high
Assess risk
• STATIC-99 while in institutional facility
• Parole uses stable tally sheet within first 30 days of release and once every 6
months, and acute tally done every face-to-face visit (both are mandatory)
Yes
• More face-to-face visits and collateral contacts
• Some are supervised on GPS
• More contact between agent and counselor
• 46 on specialized caseload in Evansville, but not every office has specialized
caseloads
• Some sex offenders get placed in regular caseloads, but supervisor must have
specialized training
• 3-day training
• Shadow specialized agent before get own caseload
• Yearly continuing education
Depends a lot on the initial sentence, but can be supervised for up to ten years if
sentence does not prohibit it
Sex offenders have access to all services available to general offender population,
plus sex offender counseling
Yes—with employment agencies and other service agencies
• Individual offices maintain own data
• Also centralized data repository for the state
• Data on risk levels, employment, demographic information, etc.
Electronic

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 73

Maintenance
Evaluation

Parole offices
Evansville Parole Office is conducting a GPS study

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 74

Iowa Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment

Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Available in 2 facilities
• Mount Pleasant houses most of the treatment programs
• Department of Corrections (DOC) has just opened a satellite program in another
facility—at the moment it is very small as it is brand new
Yes
Iowa Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA)
Not available
State-funded through the DOC
Yes
Males and females
Yes
Mandatory for all sex offenders
1,396 statewide (including 650 in Mount Pleasant)
30%
2 prisons
• Standard Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP): 281 beds
• Short-term Programming: 25 beds
• Spanish Speaking: 15 beds
• Special Needs: 63 beds
• New Satellite Program: 25 beds (all special needs)
Usually 100, but because it is new the Satellite Program currently has no waiting list
0
1:25
14-16 months
24-30 months prior to release
Cognitive behavioral therapy with victim empathy, anger management, relationships
No
Polygraphs used extensively
Manualized
Yes
35%
Not available
• Not currently
• LSI-R and STATIC-99 are used but they do not drive treatment
• The mere fact of having committed a sex offense or that there was a sexual
component to an offense determines treatment
• Moving towards using tools for dosage etc.
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not available
Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON)
DOC
No

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability

Yes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 75

Noncitizens
Gender

Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans

Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment

Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list

Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate

Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
• Males and females
• There are fewer females so treatment is slightly different—more individual
and less group treatment
Generally treatment is mandatory but some may be precluded due to physical
limitations
• There are 8 districts and each runs their own programs (there are similarities and
differences)
• The 8th district (and some others) use treatment teams
• Other districts have community treatment providers and those provides make
decisions themselves
• State-funded
• Each district provides services that the state reimburses them for
• 860 (estimate)—mostly probationers
• In 2006, there were 856
Not available
100 (estimate)
Not applicable
• Out of 856 in 2006, 607 (71%) were in treatment
• Reasons why someone might be in treatment include disability/mental health, not
being on supervision for current sex offense, treatment not required by court
Not available
Not available
Not applicable
• DOC runs a lot of programs itself
• 15-20 external providers
Mostly in urban areas
Some offenders are required to travel to attend programs
• For DOC programs, no waiting lists, but there may be a wait for counseling
services
• Information not available for external providers
Not available
• Not available
• Usually people are in treatment the entire time they are on supervision—if they
fail to complete, they are returned to prison
• Cognitive behavioral therapy-based but currently use a relapse model
• Starting to change to a Good Life model
• Each district will decide what they want to do
• They use a modified National Institute of Corrections (NIC) curriculum
• Seldom used
• Iowa does have a hormonal treatment law but it is seldom ordered by courts
Polygraphs used extensively
In most districts, more individualized but there is a standard curriculum that is
supposed to be followed
Yes
Most districts require treatment or maintenance for the entire period of supervision

Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON)
DOC
No
REENTRY

Availability
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 76

Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date

Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
•
•

Supervision
Service coordination

Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Yes
4 of 9 facilities
Modeled after NIC Transition from Prison to the Community
Yes, some
Offenders serving life sentences are ineligible
Not available
Not available
Not available
No, case management policy
DOC
DOC
State-funded through DOC
• Iowa Board of Parole
• Criteria: Use own risk assessment and rely on case manager’s progress reports
which utilize some combination of LIS-R, RRASOR, and STATIC-99
• Philosophically, at admission
• Realistically, focused on a transition period beginning 6 months from release
which is when much of the programming/services take place
• Treatment program itself
• Gradual and structured release—move to minimum security and work release
before release to the community
Yes, specially trained case managers assigned at admission
Specially trained probation and parole officers in each district, different from the
ones in prison
Yes
Yes, written and the same database is used in prison and outside so all those records
are available (progress reports, risk assessments, etc.)
Some involvement
No official number but some are involved
• Circles of Support
• Mentoring
• Continuing Treatment
• Polygraph
• GPS
• Employment
• Mental health services if needed
• Move people to parole or back to institution if relapse concerns

Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON)
DOC
No
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population

Yes
Mandatory for all sex offenders when ordered by the court
Not applicable
Yes, for those whose offense is a C Felony or above
• Probation : Traditional—399; Interstate Compact—28
• Parole : Traditional—28; Interstate Compact—9
• State Work Release (supervised by Probation/Parole Officer): 10

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 77

Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated

Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes

Tools

Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• State funding through DOC
• Offender supervision fees
• Iowa Risk Assessment: started in 1982; modified in 1986 and 1991
• STATIC-99: started in 1999
• LSI-R: started in 2000
All sex offenders
Low, Medium and High
• Determine amenability for treatment
• Evaluate their level of risk to recidivate, both specifically for sexual offending and
general recidivism.
• Provide treatment and supervision staff with client specific risk/need areas from
which to base treatment intervention
• Used to assess risk in the psychosexual evaluation: LSI-R, Jesness, STATIC-99,
ISORA 8 (currently in the research phase of development), MMPI-2, STABLE
2000 / 2004, ACUTE 2000 / 2004, SVR-20, PCL-R, Marlow Crowne Social
Desirability Scale (MCSDS), Shipley Institute of Living Scale-R, Michigan
Alcoholism Screening Test
• Used to assess risk during treatment: Polygraph, Penile Plethysmograph, Burt
Rape Myths Acceptance Scale, Bumby Cognitive Distortion, Nowicki-Strickland
Internal / External Scale, Stages of Change Scale, Abel & Becker Cognitions
Scale, Wilson Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire, Carich-Adkerson Victim Empathy
& Remorse Self-Report Inventory
• Used to assess ongoing levels of risk: Polygraph, STABLE 2000, Pre and Posttest of curriculum material
• Own customized tool—ISORA 8 (currently in research/validation phase of
development)
Series of special conditions including mandatory electronic monitoring
15-30, varies by district
• Iowa ATSA certification
• Training or knowledge about sex offender specific laws in Iowa
2 years to Life
• Group sex offender treatment
• Individual treatment, if needed.
• Couples therapy, if requested
• Family reunification
• Psychological testing
• Job Club (job seeking services)
• Referrals to substance abuse treatment and services
• Yes
• Agents frequently consult with outside treatment providers, facilitators at group
homes and staff at local residential facilities
• Agents also often work closely with employers to enable continued treatment
without interfering with employment
Rates of recidivism and characteristics correlated with recidivism
Iowa Corrections Offender Network (ICON)
DOC
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 78

Kansas Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?

Oversight by whom?

Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance

Yes
• Department of Corrections offers a grant to program to provide services
• One organization provides all services
• Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) set standard
through application
• Department of Corrections can provide the standard
• Deputy Secretary of Programs, Research, Support & Staff Development,
Department of Corrections
• Conducts audits
Department of Corrections
Only certain sex offenders
Yes
Males and females
Yes
Not available
2,700 (estimate)
11%
Lansing Correctional Facility, Hutchinson Correctional Facility, Norton Correctional
Facility, Topeka Correctional Facility (women’s)
Capacity by prison:
• Lansing: 140
• Hutchinson: 120
• Norton: 40
• Topeka: 12
100%
100%
1:20
15 months
36 months
Cognitive behavior modification, relapse prevention, Good Lives Model
No
Polygraph, penile plethysmograph, visual reaction time
Individualized
• Under previous law, offenders are not paroled until they complete treatment
• Under current law, offenders can refuse treatment
95%
• Master’s Degree or higher in Social Work, Psychology, Marriage/Family
Counseling, or counseling certification
• Continued review and training required
Not available
• MMPI, STATIC-99, LSI, Psychological Assessment
• No tool specific for the state
Demographic, completion rates, termination rate/reason, utilization, recidivism
(reconviction or sex offense or return to institution in three years)
OMIS (Department of Corrections data system)
Department of Corrections

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 79

• Annually by Department of Corrections
• Annual Program Review

Evaluation

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other CC
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other CC
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate

Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Yes
Males and females
Mandatory
Plan is initially made in the institution—then out-patient providers reassess
Department of Corrections and offender co-pay
750 (estimate)
40 (estimate)
700 (estimate)
10 (estimate)
75%
Not available
Not available
Not available
1—the Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (has state contract)
13 outpatient offices within 50 miles of all offenders
0%
0%
Not available (difficult to measure because offenders undergo contact review and
may go in and out of treatment depending on Risk Assessment and Responsivity
Rate)
Cognitive behavioral modification, relapse prevention, Good Lives Model, risk
reduction, successful living plan
No
Polygraph, penile plethysmograph, visual reaction time
Individualized
Yes
36 months
Demographic, completion (release from treatment), revocation reason, end of
sentence
TOADS data system
Department of Corrections
Annual Program Evaluation Report
REENTRY

Availability

Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility

Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release

• Available to all offenders
• Targeted to those who are high risk and will be entering major urban areas
• Pilots sites in Topeka, Wichita, and Kansas City
Yes
Yes
All 8 facilities
Working with the National Institution of Corrections, JEHT Foundation, and the
Council on State Governments
No, program depends on LSI-R score
• Eligible: Any inmate who scores high LSI-R score with 1 year to serve
• Ineligible: Any inmate who scores in the low to moderate range or any inmate with
less than nine months to serve
Not available
300 (estimate)
Less than 25% of those who score as high risk

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 80

Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available
Case management

Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• State, JEHT Foundation
• National Institute of Corrections provides technical assistance
• Sentenced under indeterminate sentencing: Parole Board makes decisions and sets
forth criteria
• Sentenced under determinate sentencing: determine in statute
One year prior to release date
Depending on LSI-R score: employment, housing, mental health treatment,
substance abuse treatment
• Reentry case managers are available in each prison
• Assigned to prisoners one year prior to release date
• Coordinate with parole officers after release for a minimum of six months
Parole officer in coordination with reentry case manager and Douglas County
Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA)
Not available
Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA)
Yes
Not available
Assistance-based community services
Treatment from Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA)
Assessment, case management notes
TOADS
Department of Corrections
Yes, but not sex offender-specific
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system

Year implemented/updated

Required for
Risk levels
Assessment

Yes
Mandatory as sentenced
Not available
Yes, for certain offenders sentenced after July 2007 (defined in statute)
Probation, Parole/Post-Release Supervision, and Community Corrections
• Parole/Post-Release Supervision: 1,512 (estimate)
• Community Corrections: 1,500
• Department of Corrections funds Parole and Community Corrections
• Judiciary funds Probation
• Classification of offenders in prison is done through a validated classification
instrument
• Classification of offenders on community supervision is done using the LSI-R
• Sex offenders are managed based on diagnostic tools used by treatment provider
who shares the recommendations for risk management and community supervision
with the supervising parole officer
• Probationary supervision is based on order from the court, which may include
information from a community provider assessment of the sex offender and
recommendations for supervision/risk management
• Department of Corrections implemented the LSI-R in 2003
• Community Corrections implemented the LSI-R in 2004
• Probation is slated to implement the LSI-R in 2009
All inmates
Low, moderate, high
Reassessment of sex offenders occurs whenever there is a change in status/risk level
based on behaviors demonstrated by the offender or at regular intervals beginning at
intake, six months later and then annually unless changes occur to require a
reassessment

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 81

Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length

Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• To determine risk and needs
• Assist case management
LSI-R and Douglas County Citizens Committee on Alcoholism (DCCCA) tools
• Yes, wherever possible
• Not in rural areas
Not available
35
Team case management, handling behavior, noticing triggers, when to use electronic
monitoring
• 2 years on average
• Supervision terms for post-release from prison are based on sentence
• Supervision length may be as long as a lifetime or as short as one year depending
on time served and sentence structure
Same as regular offenders
• Yes, there is a reentry manager
Assessment, case notes
TOADS
Department of Corrections
Yes, but not sex offender-specific

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 82

Kentucky Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility

Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content

•
•
•

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized

• In 5 correctional facilities: Kentucky State Reformatory, Luther Luckett
Correctional Complex, Western Kentucky Correctional Complex, Kentucky State
Penitentiary and the Kentucky Correctional Institute for women
• 4 of the above are men’s facilities and 1 is a women’s facility
• These are not specialized facilities, they are for the general population
Yes
• Developed by statute KRS 197.400-440
• Established a specialized sex offender program for state prisons
Provided by the Department of Corrections Licensed Psychologist Program
Administrator
State-funded
• Treatment is generally available for all sex offenders
• The only sex offenders who are not eligible to receive treatment are those
diagnosed with mental retardation and/or offenders with an active psychosis
• Lifers or death row inmates may not be eligible because of their length of stay in
prison
• A person my reject treatment or may not be admitted into treatment if s/he does
not admit to committing the sex offense
Yes, noncitizens get treatment, but may be deported after serving their sentence
Males and females
Mentally ill inmates who are treated and are not diagnosed with an active psychosis
are eligible for treatment
• Not mandatory—individuals can refuse treatment
• Treatment is tied to inmates’ good time and seeing the parole board
2,178 at the end of 2007 (estimate)
• 20% (at any given point in time)
• Eventually almost all sex offenders in prison will at least attempt treatment
5 prisons (listed above)
165 (estimate)
Approximately 40-50 people are waiting to get into treatment at anytime
0%
50:1 (as stipulated in statute)
2 years (estimate)
Have to be within 4 years of earliest possible release date—this is the reason why
lifers and death row inmates may not receive treatment as listed above (estimate)
Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention
There are two phases of treatment:
• During Phase I offenders participate in the following therapy sessions/groups:
psychoeducational, family patterns, human sexuality, social skills
• During Phase II offenders participate in the following therapy sessions/groups:
basic ownership, autobiography, advanced ownership, victim personalization,
relapse prevention planning
No, drugs are not administered
No polygraphs or voice tests are administered
• Blend of both individualized and manualized treatment plans
• The department has manuals to standardize treatment, but it is trying to shift to
more individualized plans

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 83

Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment

Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Not required, but participation in treatment is tied to good time and when the
offender sees the parole board
• If the offender refuses treatment, s/he would serve their full sentence
• Post-release registration is tied to the initial conviction and is not influenced by
treatment outcome
70% (estimate)
• Treatment providers in prison generally have a bachelor’s degree
• The Sex Offender Risk Assessment Advisory Board (SORAAB) conducts a
training every spring and the department head requires that staff attend the
training—but participation in the training is not mandatory based on department
regulations or statute
• Prior to sentencing, the Sex Offender Risk Assessment Unit, which covers the
entire state, conducts a Comprehensive Sex Offender Pre-Sentence Evaluation
(CSOPE) which is conducted by psychologists and is done in addition to a regular
pre-sentence investigation report
• This information is shared with the Department of Corrections Sex Offender
Treatment Program
• To assess risk
• To assess amenability to treatment
• STATIC-99, MnSOST, RRASOR, VRAG, PCL-R
• Kentucky does not have a customized tool
Two separate data systems: demographic and program evaluation
Administrative data
Not available
Not available
• Study on the state’s program conducted in 1997 and a follow-up in 2000 that
showed the program was effective (Barnes and Peterson)
• Above study was included in Hanson’s meta-analysis report in 2002

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans

Funding

Population
Probation

Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number

Yes
No
Males and females
• Treatment is mandatory—if offenders do not participate they can be revoked
• Stipulated in probation/parole processes statute
• Treatment provider is responsible for treatment
• Treatment provider and the probation/parole officer are a part of a team and they
share information back and forth with each other about each case
• State funded
• In the past few years the Department of Corrections has started to collect nominal
fees ($5/month for indigent offenders and $20/month for non-indigent) from the
individuals receiving treatment
• 1,200 (estimate)
• Above number includes probation and parole but the vast majority are on
probation
• Very few sex offenders are paroled each year
See above
Not applicable
35% (estimate)
Not applicable
Not applicable
• 14 state-sponsored providers (official Department of Corrections number)
• Above number does not include private providers

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 84

Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Treatment providers are generally available statewide with the exception of two
regions
No waiting lists for state providers because they would be referred to private
providers if they did not have availability
0%
60% (estimate)
• Same as prison—only additional components are partner alert sessions where
offenders bring a support partner to group
• The support partner works with the offender and speaks to any warning signs
No
Polygraphs
Same as in-prison treatment
Yes, community providers conduct an assessment of where the offender is at in terms
of treatment progress so as not to duplicate what has already been done in prison
30 months (estimate)
Two separate data systems: demographic and program evaluation
Administrative data
Not available
Not available
• Study on the state’s program conducted in 1997 and a follow-up in 2000 that
showed the program was effective (Barnes and Peterson)
• Above study was included in Hanson’s meta-analysis report in 2002
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release

Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming

Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria
Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision

•
•
•
•

There is reentry programming in the state but nothing systematic in place
The reentry programming is currently undergoing an extreme evaluation
Some pre-release services available—availability depends on the institution
In some institutions a veterans’ program comes in and talks about services
available to veterans when released from prison
• The social security office also speaks to inmates about how to apply for disability,
etc.
Not available
Not available
• No specialized sex offender program
• There was some emergency assistance funding that was provided for sex offender
management services and problems associated with residency restrictions but the
money is going to be gone by the end of the summer 2008
Anyone serving in a state institution
Not available
Not available
Not available
No state standard for reentry programming
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable—there really is no funding
• Parole board is the releasing authority
• Criteria not available
3 months prior to release (estimate)
Not available
• Every inmate has a case manager (not specific to reentry)
• State employs pre-release coordinators who run “prison to street” programs
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 85

• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Not available
Minimal
Some—mostly occurs in more urban parts of the state
Not available
• Same services that are available for the general offending population
• Sex offenders participate in sex offender treatment
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability

Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding

Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment

Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload

Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Yes—probation, parole, sex offender conditional discharge
• Sex offender conditional discharge means that the offender is released on his/her
minimum expiration date and then is supervised in the community for a period of
5 years—during this 5 year period, the offender participates in treatment as well
Community supervision is not mandatory if the offender serves the full sentence
Not available
No
Probation, parole, conditional discharge
• 1,419 as of March 2008 (official number, Department of Corrections monthly data
entry summary)
• State pays for community supervision
• Sliding scale for treatment
• Private programs charge different amounts
Yes
Not available
All offenders
• For sex offenders: high, moderate, low
• Other offenders: all of the above and administrative level of supervision—sex
offenders are generally not at this level
• Assessed when community supervision begins
• Information from in-prison treatment staff is passed onto community supervision
agents
Not available
Same tool used for sex offenders as other offenders—tool does not have a name but
has been validated
Yes—it has been in place for 2 years
• Higher level of supervision
• Smaller caseloads
• 65 cases per officer (estimate)
• Standard of 35 cases per officer on non-SOISP caseloads, but most caseloads are
much higher
The state is in the process of getting policies approved for preliminary training and
some additional training for officers
4-5 years (estimate)
• Sex offender treatment
• Referrals made for vocational training and other services
Collaboration is a critical element—case managers collaborate with in-prison
treatment staff, private providers, state-sponsored providers, etc.
• No individual data is stored
• The department transferred to a unified case management system about two years
ago—still in a state of transition
Not available
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 86

Maine Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender

Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes

• 60 bed Therapeutic Community (only sex offenders in one facility)
• It is available to all prisoners but if they are accepted they must be transferred to
that facility
No
Not applicable
Department of Corrections (DOC) tries to follow Association for the Treatment of
Sexual Abusers (ATSA) guidelines
State-funded through DOC
Yes
• Males only
• There are only 150 females in total incarcerated statewide so not a critical mass of
sex offenders
Same process as other offenders—offered unless the illness precludes appropriate
treatment
• Medium custody facility so not available for anyone who is closed custody
• If part of case plan, becomes mandatory (after screening and assessment) if they
meet custody classification
• Not compelled—right to refuse but subject to sanctions if refuse treatment that is
mandated in their case plan (e.g. not eligible for community programs, paid jobs,
furloughs etc.)
357 (official)
16% (official)
1
60 beds
100%
0%
1:15
48 months
48 months prior to release – try to time it so there is transition to community after
program completed
• Cognitive behavioral therapy with some victim empathy, biofeedback, arousal
control
• Use both groups and individual treatment (in tandem)
Historically no, but not ruled out
Polygraphs
Manualized
• No, because of determinate sentencing
• No impact on classification but might in the future—legislature is looking at it
(along with other aspects of sex offender laws and policies)
Too early to tell (only in operation for 3 years)
• Have to be licensed clinicians
• Director is a PhD psychiatrist and the rest have Master’s degrees or higher
• No certification required
• Attend annual ATSA conferences
• Ongoing in-service work
Yes
Risk, needs and responsivity

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 87

• STATIC 99
• RRASOR
• LSI-R
A significant amount is collected and/or the provider has been asked to collect
• Admissions and terminations
• Average number of participants, number of group sessions, number of prisoners
dropping out, or refusing treatment, number of readmissions, phase of treatment,
number of successful completions
• Staffing vacancies, number of aftercare groups conducted, number of releases to
community, number of prisoners in transition to community, number of prisoners
participating in reentry who were released, number of transition plans submitted
to parole officer, number of those returned by parole officer, number of
comprehensive assessments
• Some individual level factors, number and seriousness of disciplinary reports
• Compare intensive phase with pre-program behavior
• Number of sex offenders successfully integrated into the community, number of
program completers compared with non-completers who re-offend—sex offenses
and non-sex offenses
Electronic
DOC and provider (kept separately)
None

Tools

Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized

Yes
Males and females
• Not mandatory—at the court’s discretion
• No parole but split sentence with probation (judicial parole) and court decides the
conditions of supervision
Collaboration between probation/parole officer and treatment and containment team
(made up of law enforcement, victims’ services, etc.)
• Primarily offender funded
• Some federal funding designated for indigents now that childless adults no longer
eligible for Medicaid
692 (official)
Not applicable
Not applicable
95-98% (estimate from probation/parole officers)
Not applicable
Not applicable
20 (estimate)
Available in different regions but there are certain rural areas where services are not
available
Not available
Not available
Not available
• Varies by program
• Some of them are evidence-based with manualized curriculums and cognitive
behavioral therapy while others are not
• They try to refer to the better programs but that’s not always possible
Not to his knowledge
Polygraphs
Manualized (some)

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 88

Continuity of treatment

Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Generally
• One of the benefits they have is that the largest community provider is the same
company that does the prison-based treatment
• Varies—lifetime for some
• Some will continue treatment when their probation period ends
Not collected—no capacity
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 89

Maryland Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs

Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration

• Treatment is provided to offenders in the community, but there is little that the
state pays for and provides
• When a court order requires an individual to get treatment, it is the responsibility
of the probation/parole agent or the individual to find the appropriate
treatment/resource
Not sure
Males and females
• Determined by judge or parole board
• Both the judge and the parole board can add specific stipulations about treatment
• Treatment plans are conducted by the treatment provider
• The state does not tell providers how to do the work
• Majority of treatment is paid for by the individual
• The state funds one small out-patient program—the Special Offender Clinic that
is now 27 years old and was originally focused on domestic violence
1,000-1,500—accounts for both parole and probation (estimate)
See above
Not applicable
20%--accounts for both parole and probation (estimate)
See above
Not applicable
50
• Treatment available throughout the state but more concentrated in certain areas
• 12-15 (of the 23 counties in the state) have at least one provider (estimate)
Baltimore county may have a waiting list but in other places it is unlikely
0%
65% (not an average of all programs throughout the state)
Relapse prevention, victim empathy, healthy sexuality
• Only one program in the state administers anti-androgen medications
• If patients are in need of medication, they are referred to the above provider for a
prescription
No
Combination of individualized and manualized plans
Very little treatment is available in prison so there is practically nothing to match
• 1-2 years for adults (estimate)
• 2 years for adolescents (estimate)
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population

Yes—probation and parole
• Judges and parole commissioners
• Legislative stipulations
Not available
No
Probation and parole (consolidated under the Division of Parole and Probation)
• Parole: 97
• Probation: 1,325
• Other: 519 (probation before judgment, pretrial, etc.)
• All above are official Division of Parole and Probation numbers

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 90

Funding
Assessment

Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

• State funded
• Offender pays a fee
• The Sex Offender Screening and Risk Assessment (SOSRA) agency was created
when the state passed legislation in 1997 that mandated community notification
• The Division of Community Corrections conducts a risk/needs assessment when
offenders are sentenced or released to community supervision. The same tool is
used for all sex offenders and is not specific to the sex offender population
2007
Not available
• Levels 1, 2, 3 (1 and 2 intensive) 3 is intermediate
• Specific to sex offenders
• To provide information on when to enhance treatment and supervision
• Determine risk
• STATIC-99 for the first 30 days
• ACUTE completed every 90 days thereafter
Yes
Enhanced supervision
57 (estimate)
Undergo training in the Collaborative Offender Management and Enforced
Treatment
35 months (estimate)
• Sex offender treatment, drug treatment, education/GED, job placement, mental
health treatment
• Refer sex offenders for transitional housing
• Yes—there is team called COMET that follows the containment model
• Team includes parole/probation agents, supervisors, state’s attorney, Baltimore
City Police Department Sex Offender Unit and treatment providers—soon to
include polygraphers as well

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 91

Massachusetts Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
REENTRY (Refers to state-level practices)
Availability

Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility

Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding

Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
o Supervision
o Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
o Faith-based
o Role
Services available

• Reentry services involve the Department of Corrections (DOC), parole, and local
jails
• DOC and parole initiatives are coordinated at the state level
• Practices vary at the local level—different sheriff agencies do different things
Yes
Yes—8 reentry centers focused in urban areas
100%--every state facility has reentry programming
Parole initiative is “Regional Reentry Centers”
Yes—Intensive Parole for Sex Offenders (IPSO)
• Everyone who discharges from state prison is offered the services of a reentry
center (except for those discharged with probation only and youths)—but this is
voluntary, not required
• Reentry centers target state offenders with no supervision ties, county offenders
with no supervision ties, and offenders coming out on parole
• Sex offenders are not eligible for transitional housing services
Not available
Not available
Two independent state standards (DOC/parole)—but they are coordinated
Individually developed, but each agency participates in the other’s process
Executive Office of Public Safety
• Primarily state-funded, but supplemented by grants
• In 2004, MA received funding from VOTIS (Violent Offender Truth in
Sentencing) and SVORI (Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative)
Mainly provided by DOC, except for employment portfolio
• Parole Board (all members appointed by Governor);
• Decisions based on 2 criteria:
1. Is release compatible with community safety?
2. What is the risk for recidivism? (in process of validating COMPAS for
Massachusetts)
6 months prior to release or time permitting
• Employment portfolio
• Discharge planning based on individual needs
• Must have approved home plan and approved work plan before release
• Team approach
• Parole and DOC case managers
Parole officers and probation officers (or both)
Parole officers and probation officers (or both)
• Information exchange between DOC and parole
• Parole officers play a role in service coordination as well
Yes
Involved in service delivery for sex offenders, but do not comprise a large proportion
of service providers for sex offenders
Service delivery—housing, transportation
• Reentry centers are not residential—just day treatment
• Two reentry officers in each center
• Services include employment assistance (including portfolio development),
vocational, substance abuse, mental health, transportation, child support
mediation sessions, help obtaining state identification)

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 92

• Housing program does not serve sex offenders though
• If reentry centers cannot provide services, give referrals to other community
organizations
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Demographics, offenses, recidivism, substance abuse, mental health, housing
sustainability
Electronic
Parole—has many university partners as well
IPSO mandated evaluation

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 93

Michigan Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests

Individualized vs. manualized

Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

On probation and parole
Yes, if not being deported
Males and females
• For probationers, dependent on whether judge orders it (rare for judge not to order
it)
• Mandatory for parolees
• Yearlong treatment is required by state standard
• Must do assessment—treatment is individualized to an extent within the template
• Department of Corrections (DOC) funding
• Co-pay system whereby offender pays portion—this is a sliding scale where
offenders pay based on their income
Approximately 3,000 (rough estimate)
950
Not applicable
All sex offenders will be in treatment at some point, but it may not be funded by
DOC
All sex offenders on parole required to attend treatment
Not applicable
All locally-based
65
Less availability in rural areas because do not have much of a sex offender
population or providers in these areas
No waiting due to lack of funding
Not available
77% of parolees (official statistic but dated)
68% of probationers (official statistic but dated)
Relapse prevention, cognitive-behavioral therapy
No chemicals or drugs
• Polygraph exams are used in Detroit, Kalamazoo, Muskegon, and Flint—but not
statewide
• Primarily maintenance exams
• Individualized within the state template
• All must develop relapse prevention plan, identify triggers and thinking errors,
etc.
Community treatment is consistent with prison-based treatment and meant to pick up
where prison treatment left off
At least a year
Beginning in October 2008, the state will develop a systematic model of data
collection
Not available
Not available
Not available
• No studies on treatment, but there has been a polygraph study that has not yet
been released
• Study is a randomized design and found that the polygraph did not deter new
offenses
REENTRY

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 94

Availability

Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management
Post-release services

• Reentry efforts began in 2003
• Culminated in Michigan Prisoner Reentry Initiative (MPRI)—an interdepartmental collaboration
• Reentry is statewide but not fully implemented for all three phases, which means
that percentages and numbers will increase gradually over time
• Once the initiative is up to scale, every prisoner will be in MPRI from the point of
reception to prison
• Content of programming will vary by risk level—goal is a system that is
responsive to individuals
Yes—particularly in in-reach facilities, which house moderate and high-risk
offenders
Yes
• 14 in-reach facilities out of 48 prisons
• Transition 60% of returning prisoner population
• MPRI—3 phase process:
1. Phase I: Lasts until positive parole decision—this is when assessments are done
2. Phase II: Transferred to special facility before release to develop unified case
plan
3. Phase III: Release
• Parole Board decides who is moderate to high risk and thus eligible for in-reach
• Once in in-reach, get assessment by COMPAS (eventually COMPAS will be used
to assess risk level)
Yes—sex offender treatment (6 month cognitive-behavioral therapy mandatory for
all sex offenders)
About half of sex offenders in prison are eligible for sex offender programming (the
rest are too far removed or already had it)
• At any given time, at least 750 sex offenders are in formal treatment
• Can simultaneously be involved in other training as well
Almost all offenders under supervision are in treatment
Minimum standards for MPRI—built in as conditions of funding
Not Available
Planning Community Development Administration and Correctional Facilities
Administration
Phase I being launched with women’s program first
• Parole Board (part of DOC) is releasing authority
• Decisions informed by Michigan Parole Guidelines instrument—not developed as
risk instrument, but has been validated against recidivism criteria
o Sorts into low, average, and high probability of parole.
• Rest of decision based on case review and interview
• In process of incorporating COMPAS into release decisions
Transferred to in-reach prison 60 days prior to release
• Cognitive-behavioral therapy, and other services as needed
• Special program for youths adjudicated as juveniles (will be able to do Phase
I/Phase II)
• Launching new program for offenders with medical illness
• Assistant Resident Unit Supervisors manage cases during Phase I
• Institutional Parole agents manage cases during Phase II (in-reach facilities)
• Phase III delivered upon release onto parole; $33 million for reentry
• MPRI not domain-specific—funds can be used for anything
• CASOM being piloted in Kalamazoo County

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 95

Case management

• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement

•
•

Faith-based
Role

Services available

Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Available for duration of parole—especially MPRI
• If there is an ongoing need for services, offenders are referred to agencies that can
provide care (typical parole term is 2 years)
• Collaborative case management team—cross-training for case managers and
community providers
• Parole agent is lead case manager
• Reentry steering committees also exist at the county or multi-county level
• Case management review at least every 6 months
Specialized caseloads for sex offenders
Not Available
• 18 administrative agencies administer funds to local jurisdictions
• Selection is based on how closely practices conform to evidence-based practices
• Nonprofits provide most services (very few state-sponsored services)
25% (estimate)
• Service delivery
• Also involved in policy—faith-based providers sit on reentry steering committees
• Phase III delivered upon release onto parole
• Services provided as needed through contracts with local agencies
• Working to standardize treatment
• There will be a Corrections Program Checklist beginning in 2009
• CMIS is the current system—only picks people up when they go to prison
• All data will be moved to OMNI—which begins at court disposition
• OMNI is the primary data base for the Department—contains everything in CMIS
and additional data
• Data available include comprehensive criminal histories, behavioral misconduct,
training, educational assessment, MMPI, demographics, family background,
release date, parole decisions, performance
Electronic
DOC maintains OMNI and CMIS
Used for tracking but have not done evaluations due to lack of resources
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision

Supervising agencies
Population
Funding

•
•
•
•

Available but not mandatory
Supervision under consolidated probation and parole administration
Determined by judges
Mandatory incarceration for Criminal Sexual Conduct in 2nd Degree, and Criminal
Sexual Conduct in 3rd degree
• No mandatory post-release supervision for sex offenders

• Amendment just passed to Michigan Compiled Law (MCL) 771.2a.—offenders
convicted of certain listed offenses must be on probation for a minimum of 5
years
• Also recent legislation that requires, for offenses committed on or after August
28, 2006, lifetime electronic monitoring of paroled or discharged sex offenders
who are sentenced to prison for MCL 750.520b, Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC)
in the first degree, or MCL 750.520c(1)(a), CSC in the sentencing degree
(including conspiracy)
• Under this new legislation, lifetime electronic monitoring is also required for
individuals convicted for MCL 750.520c, CSC in the third degree, if the offender
was 17 years of age or older and the victim was less than 13 years of age at the
time of offense (including conspiracy)
Probation and Parole (consolidated)
5,004 probationers and parolees serving on sex offense or with a history of sexual
offending (official statistic from month-end report in 2005)
General state funds through DOC

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 96

Classification system

Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Specialized caseloads

Provisions

Caseload
Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• No sex-offender specific tools to classify sex offenders into risk level—but
Probation and Parole has grant from Center for Sex Offender Management
(CSOM) to pilot VASOR in one county
• Currently use COMPAS (but no sex offender-specific tool)
• 1970s
• Sex offender-specific tools being piloted now
Referrals and assessments
Sex offenders automatically go to maximum supervision, regardless of what risk
assessment tools show
Determine supervision level
• VASOR, COMPASS, STATIC-99
• Polygraph used for initial community supervision assessment, history,
compliance/maintenance
• Yes—if there are enough sex offenders in an area to make up a caseload (mostly
urban areas)
• In smaller rural areas, there are specialized caseloads, but they contain a mix of
sex offenders and other offenders
• GPS, electronic monitoring on parole
• Polygraph used in three counties that cover a substantial portion of the
supervision population
35+ for specialized sex offender caseloads
• Polygraph examiners go through special training for sex offenders
• Supervision agents are selected for specialized caseloads based on interest—
receive additional training and GPS training
Depends on sentence (determined by judge and Parole Board)
• Treatment, but not much else—depends on the area
• MPRI forms collaborative groups with communities—work with parolees to
address criminogenic needs
Referrals to services, but restrictions on housing make it difficult to provide
assistance
OMNI is statewide system
Not available
Not available
Not available
• Study on polygraph and group treatment will be completed in September 2008—
examines effect of these combined services on violation behavior
• Also piloting VASOR in Probation and Parole—funded through Center for Sex
Offender Management

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 97

Missouri Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available

Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

State law mandates treatment in the prison
New provider
Department of Corrections (DOC)
State funded through DOC
Not available
Males and females
Yes
State law mandates treatment in the prison
Not available
Not available
• 3 (2 male, 1 female)
• Farmington has the largest portion of sex offenders: Missouri Sex Offender
Program (MOSOP)
• Vendalia: Women’s Eastern Reception Center
• Bontair Facility: Eastern Reception
Not available
100%
0%
Not available
MOSOP—9 months to 1 year
18 months before release date
No
No
Manualized
Yes
Not available
Not available
Yes—but no customized tool
Risk assessment, identify level of deviancy and victim preference
STATIC 99, Hair Psychopathy, Abel Screen
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation

Yes
Males and females
Mandatory for all sex offenders
Containment model—therapist and parole officer work together
Mainly the sex offenders themselves
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 98

Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
Not available
95% (estimate)—varies statewide
As above
As above
56 that have been approved by the DOC
• Concentrated in metropolitan areas
• Many in St. Louis—fewer in rural areas
None (estimate)
Not available
Not available
Cognitive behavioral therapy
No
Polygraphs
More individualized
Yes, community therapists have access to MOSOP records in prison
3-4 years, but sometimes up to five years (estimate)
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release

Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date

Yes—many services
• In some areas
• Kansas City and St. Louis initiatives
• There is a lot of partnering with faith-based organizations
• 11 of 20 institutions currently have it (low and medium security)
• Moving towards expanding to all institutions
• Since 2004, reentry has been done by the DOC
• With an inter-agency team, the DOC tailored the National Institute of Corrections
Transition from Prison to the Community Initiative model to Missouri’s needs
• Governor signed Executive Order in 2006 making the team permanent—with
charge of integrating practices and principles across state government
• Currently called Missouri Reentry Process (MRP)
No, can only access same reentry services as other offenders
All sex offenders
Not available
Not available
Not available
DOC and some outside contractors developed core programming
State MRP Steering Team – state agencies, community providers, ex-offenders, law
enforcement, etc.
DOC funds pre-release programming
• Parole Board
• Decisions based on pre-release plans, victims issues, Missouri DOC risk/needs
scale
• Move into transitional phase six months prior to release–usually relocated to
transitional housing unit/wing

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 99

Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• When services expanded to all institutions, higher security inmates will be offered
services too (currently no access to transitional units)
Transition planning in the areas of employment, soft and hard skills, parenting,
cognitive skills, etc.
• Case manager assigned when person begins prison sentence
• Assigned a new case manager and team when he/she moves into transitional stage
No specific post-release programs
Parole officers
Parole officer is under DOC so receive a lot of information from prison case
managers—including Transitional Accountability Plan
• In the last five years, they have really become increasingly involved
• Currently substantially involved
High level of involvement from faith-based organizations (estimate)
Direct services including mentoring, some case management, housing, etc.
• No services funded by DOC
• One project in St Louis that provides services to those who complete sentence
without any post-release supervision
Data on all offenders including return rates, etc.
Electronic
DOC
• No—but may be developing a report card with outcomes
• Sex offenders will be one category in the report card
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements

Supervision
Length

Yes
Mandatory for all sex offenders
Yes – for a specific population that will be coming out on parole (all are still
incarcerated)
Probation and parole
Not available
• Intervention fee paid by all those supervised including sex offenders
• Also DOC funding
• Risk system was developed at least 19 years ago
• Needs system has been updated more recently
All sex offenders
Minimum, regular, enhanced—sex offenders always regular level or higher
Dangerous Felons classification as well—includes some sex offenders (sodomy,
forcible rape)
Risk assessment
• STATIC-99 for offenders going through Sentencing Assessment Report
• Providers use own assessment tools for those in treatment
• In many areas
• Not in some of the rural areas because not feasible
45 maximum
• DOC is currently developing journeyman training—based on typology, etc.
• Quarterly meetings between officers and providers
• Encourage and support any outside trainings on sex offenders
• 5 years for probation

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 100

Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Not available for parole
Electronic Monitoring, GPS, Community Supervision Centers, Residential Center,
mandatory treatment, family groups
Yes—important component of Missouri supervision
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 101

Montana Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate

Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance

• Available in Montana state prison
• No treatment in regional prisons
Yes
Montana State Offender Treatment Association (MSOTA)
Montana State Offender Treatment Association (MSOTA)
Montana Department of Corrections
Yes, although most are deported before treatment commences
• Mostly males
• Fewer than 10 female sex offenders in Montana Women’s Prison
Participate in a special needs sex offender group
• Available for all sex offenders
• Mandatory for all sex offenders to complete Phase I (16 week educational group)
580 (official)
Not available
1—Montana State Prison
Not available
Not available
Not available
1:7-8
Phase I: 16 weeks
Phase II: open-ended (usually 15 to 30 months)
Prioritized by earliest potential release dates
Not available
No—drugs are only available 2 weeks before leaving treatment
32 polygraphs per year under contract
Both—therapist tailors treatment to individual needs
• Yes—for releases onto probation and parole
• Completion of program not always a factor in post-release classification—Parole
board decides using risk instruments
• 30% of entries
• About 50 per year complete Phase II
• 90% of those in Phase I are required to complete Phase II (estimate)
• Must be licensed by Montana State Offender Treatment Association
• Must have master’s degree in social work, psychology, or counseling and
appropriate state license to perform mental health therapy
• Must complete 2,000 hours of supervised experience in evaluation and treatment
of a sex offender
• Must pass written and oral exams and submit work samples reviewed by
membership committee
• Assess risk
• Community notification
Static-99, MnSOST-R
Completion of treatment, reincarceration, etc
Electronic
Department of Corrections

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 102

Evaluation

Treatment evaluations
COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Males and females
• Not mandatory but majority go into community treatment
• If an individual goes through Phase I, II, and III in prison treatment, may not need
community treatment
Developed by treatment provider and probation officer
Offender
621 (official as of 3/20/08)
93 (official as of 3/20/08)
2 on Department of Corrections Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) (official as of
3/20/08)
15 active licensed providers
Statewide
0%
0%
Not available
• Cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal therapy, etc
• No set treatment modality
Available but rarely used
Montana Sex Offender Treatment Association requires all sex offenders do
polygraph once every 12 months
Both
Yes—treatment providers usually receive information on treatment in prison from
the institution
8 months to 4 years
Demographics, etc
Electronic
Montana Department of Corrections
No formal studies
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Yes
Yes
100%
No
No
All sex offenders are eligible
Not available
Not available
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
Department of Corrections
• Parole Board
• Decisions based on offender’s compliance with court conditions (treatment, GED,
chemical dependency treatment, etc) and assessment tools (MnSOST-R, STATIC-

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 103

Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
•

Service coordination

Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

99)
• Preparation starts at intake
• Most services begin upon release
• 2 pre-release centers accept sex offenders
• Private centers are similar to regular prerelease
Probation officers in prison help with transition (about 90 days prior to release)
• Probation officers—not same as prison case manager
• Probation officers receive information on risk level, treatment completed in prison,
treatment needs in community
• Post-release supervisors coordinate services for sex offenders
• Some work closely with sex offender therapists in community, but varies by
location
Yes
Majority are not faith-based
Not available
Services available, but for a limited time
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population

Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes

Tools

Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Caseload
Supervisor requirements

Yes
Not mandatory
Sex offenders under parole, probation or conditional release are supervised
Yes—for sex offenders who qualify under state statute MCA 45-5-503 (4)(b) and 455-507 (5) (b)
• Probation: 621 (official as of 3/20/08)
• Parole: 93 (official as of 3/20/08)
• Other: 2 on Department of Corrections Intensive Supervision Probation, (official
as of 3/20/08)
Montana State Legislature
Tier-level system enacted by Montana Legislature in 1997
All offenders required to register
• Tier 1 (low risk)
• Tier 2 (moderate risk)
• Tier 3 (high risk or sexually violent predator)
• To determine appropriate supervision level and to assist supervising officer in
identifying needs
• Sex offenders reassessed every 6 months
• Standard risk/needs assessment developed by Department of Corrections
• Not sex-offender specific tool
• Same tools used by parole and probation
Yes
• Officers receive additional training
• Work with treatment providers, law enforcement, family members, and employers
to ensure more appropriate supervision for offender
Should be 40, but can be higher in certain areas of state
Officers encouraged to attend specialized training for sex offender supervision

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 104

Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Varies
• Most sex offenders required to attend sex offender treatment or aftercare in
community
• Employment and housing assistance
Case managers encouraged to work with treatment providers, employers, law
enforcement officials, family members, and anyone involved with sex offenders in
community
Demographics
Electronic
Montana Department of Corrections
No formal studies

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 105

New Hampshire Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration

Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Available only in specialized facilities for sex offenders
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
State
Yes
Males and females
Yes, but not required
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders, but they are unlikely to be paroled if they do
not complete recommended form of treatment
• Determined through actuarial risk assessments, court/sentencing
recommendations
737 (estimate)
15%
2
• 72 in intensive treatment
• 12 in cognitive-behavioral therapy
• 12 in relapse prevention
• 3 in female facility
50% (estimate)
0% (official)
1:22
• About 18 months for intensive treatment
• 6 months for cognitive-behavioral therapy
• Female group and relapse prevention are open-ended
Approximately 24 months prior to release date
Process-oriented groups, psychoeducational groups, cognitive-behavioral therapy,
relapse prevention, victim empathy training, arousal control, social skills training,
sexual education/awareness, individualized treatment planning
Only medication for mental health issues available
Polygraphs
Individualized
• No, but individuals who do not complete treatment are unlikely to be paroled
• Not a factor in post-release classification
Not available
• Masters degree and 2 years post graduate experience
• Sex offender-specific training and experience
Assess risk level, treatment planning, assess individual needs
Clinical interview, actuarial risk assessment, dynamic risk assessment, STATIC-99,
TNPS, VASOR (Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender Risk)
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 106

COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Males and females
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders
• Court or Parole Board order or Parole/Probation Officer makes decisions
Treatment providers decides treatment plan—sometimes with input of
parole/probation officers
Offender
597 total (estimate)
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Polygraphs
Both
Depends on treatment provider
Not available
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
•
•

Supervision
Service coordination

Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research

Yes
Yes
100%
No
No
All releasing offenders have access to case counselors/case managers to assist with
release plans
Not available
Not available
• Parole Board
• Release decisions based on institutional behavior, program completion, risk to
public, minimum parole date
2 months prior to release date
Access to same services as other offenders
Case managers assigned based on housing unit
• Probation/parole Officers supervise sex offenders in reentry programs after
release from prison
Probation/parole officer
Probation/parole officer receives information regarding housing, employment,
education, program requirements
Yes, but limited
Not available
Some provide transitional living arrangements (28-day programs)
Services available until the maximum sentence date

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 107

Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length

Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Not mandatory
Judge or Parole Board decides
Yes—for those convicted of aggravated felonious sexual assault with victim under
13 years of age
597 total
State
To ascertain level of supervision and to develop a case plan
• LSI-R, RRASOR
• Same tools used by parole and probation
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
• Varies by offense classification (misdemeanor or felony)
• 2 years average for misdemeanor
• 5 years average for felony
• May be longer for parolees
Outpatient sex offender treatment
Yes—probation/parole officers make referrals for treatment, monitor progress in
treatment, and exchange information with treatment providers
Demographic, physical, offense, sentencing, supervisory notes, status
Electronic
New Hampshire Department of Corrections
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 108

New Jersey Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available

Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
•

Drugs

• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Treatment provided in Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center—accepts only
compulsive and repetitive sex offenders
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
• Department of Corrections
• Subcontracts
Yes
Males and females
Available but not required
Available for all sex offenders as long as they are amenable, willing, compulsive, and
repetitive
685 (official)
Not available
• 1 sex offender facility for males
• Another facility that treats female sex offenders (Edna Mahan Correctional
Facility)
Not available
0%
0%
1:40 (estimate)
Varies (several months to several decades)
Intake
Integrated treatment model includes relapse prevention, cognitive-behavioral therapy,
victim empathy, social skills, arousal reconditioning, therapeutic community
• Some on anti-androgens
• Small number on SSRIs
None
Individualized
No
Not applicable
• Master’s degree or higher in psychology or Master’s degree in social work
• No certification required
• Continued training for social workers
For sentencing
• Personality Assessment Inventory, House-Tree-Person, Shipley Institute of Living
Scale
• No customized state tool
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 109

North Carolina Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

One prison-based program
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
Department of Corrections
Yes
Males only
Not required, but can attend if they are stable
Optional and voluntary for those who admit to sex offense
4,743 as of 2/29/08 (official)
Not available
1
56 per year (official)
100% (about 250 individuals on waiting list)
None
1:8 (official)
5 months
Varies
Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, arousal control, behavior
modification, empathy training, skill building
No
No
Both
Not available
95% of eligible offenders completed (official)
• No certification, but standards
• Must be licensed in North Carolina
• Therapists must be able to do group therapy, work with inmates, and be willing to
train in sex offender specific treatment for several years
To provide background information and devise individual treatment plans
• STATIC-99, MSI
• State-developed tool: A Personal History Inventory (instrument used to gather
information and guide an interview)
Test results
Paper and electronic
Sexual Offender Accountability and Responsibility (SOAR) program
No

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 110

North Dakota Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Not available
MnSOST-R and STATIC-99 were validated on the prison and probation populations
in 2003
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans

Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections

Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections

Treatment providers
Number

Distribution

Percentage with waiting list

• Human Service Centers (under Department of Health and Human Services) treat
low and moderate risk offenders
• Rule-CPC program (under Department of Human Services) treats high risk
offenders
• Provided through contract with Massachusetts counseling business
Yes—unless deported
Available for males, but not much available for females
• Not mandatory—must be court-ordered or have conditions of supervision
amended
• Probation—probation officers will usually recommend that sex offender
conditions be imposed during pre-sentence investigation, but judges do not have to
abide by it
• Parole—parolees must participate in sex offender treatment program, but most sex
offenders in prison are not paroled
• Therapist makes individualized treatment plan in conjunction with probation
officer
• The Stable and LSI-R are reassessed every 6 months. The ACUTE is completed on
a monthly basis
• Stable factors reassessed every 6 months
• Treatment provided by the Human Service Centers is funded by the State
• Offenders are charged on a sliding fee scale
• Rule-CPC funded through a grant provided to the Department of Human Services
• No charge for offenders participating in Rule-CPC programming
350 (estimate)
Less than 10—most sex offenders are not paroled
• Community Service Agencies in the state may supervise misdemeanor cases
• One Community Service Agency has 5 or fewer misdemeanor sex offenders on
their caseload
50 (estimate)
Not available
• More than 50 high risk sex offenders and/or those with adult victims involved in
treatment with Rule-CPC
• Number of sex offenders involved in treatment programs through the regional
human service centers not available
• 5 human service regions provide treatment to all sex offenders except for high risk
offender and those with adult victims
• Rule-CPC: 5 locations in North Dakota with local therapists
In most populated areas:
• Human Service Centers—Fargo, Bismarck, Dickinson, Minot, Grand Forks
• Rule-CPC—Fargo, Jamestown, Bismarck, Minot, Grand Forks
• No waiting list for Rule-CPC

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 111

Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment

Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Probably short waiting list for Human Service Centers
Not available
• Only a few offenders in Rule-CPC have been revoked
• Human Service Centers—completion rate not available
• Rule-CPC includes cognitive-behavioral therapy, educational program, relapse
prevention, victim empathy
• Human Service Centers include cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention
• Also an educational program in at least one Human Service Center for sex
offenders who do not need intensive outpatient treatment
No, but will be available soon
• Human Service Centers use polygraphs
• Rule-CPC uses polygraphs and plethysmographs
Individualized
• Most sex offenders in prison do not receive parole
• If an offender was in a prison treatment program, he/she is often referred to the
Human Service Center for follow-up treatment
• Community and prison treatment are more similar than dissimilar
At least a couple of years
Number of referrals, number involved in treatment programming, treatment progress,
demographics
Electronic and paper
Rule-CPC and Human Service Centers
• Too soon to evaluate Rule-CPC
• Individual Human Service Centers may be doing own evaluations
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes

Tools

Specialized caseloads

Provisions

Yes
Very few sex offenders are paroled
Not available
No
Probation and parole
• Very few sex offenders on parole
• 350 on probation (estimate)
State
Implemented in 1990’s
All sex offenders
• Low, moderate, and high risk
• Risk is determined by the SORAC committee (reports to Attorney General)
• Parole/probation officers use the MnSOST-R, STATIC 99 to determine risk
levels. They also use the Stable and ACUTE to assess risk and implement a case
supervision plan to address the areas of risk.
• Treatment and programming decisions, community notification, level of
supervision, placement on GPS, etc
• SORAC committee has overwrite authority on assessment scores
• MnSOST-R, STATIC 99, Stable, ACUTE, LSI-R
• Stable and LSI-R administered every 6 months
• ACUTE administered every month
• 7 sex offender specialists who only supervise sex offenders
• In rural areas, one officer is assigned to have all sex offenders on caseload, but
majority of caseload is non-sex offender
• 20 specialized sex offender conditions in addition to 25 general conditions
• Sex offender conditions include no contact with minors, no loitering, etc

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 112

Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance

Evaluation

30-40
Training (minimum of 800 hours) and 5 years experience in field
Varies
Treatment, vocational training, chemical dependency treatment, psychiatric services,
employment through job services
• Yes—between case managers and HSC
• Also Sex Offender Containment Task Forces in Fargo, Jamestown, Bismarck,
Minot, and Grand Forks
• Task forces were originally set up by the DOCR to determine which sex offenders
would need to be placed on GPS but they now play a role in systemic decisions
and information sharing
• Task forces usually include representatives from law enforcement,
parole/probation officers, state attorney, victim advocates, treatment providers,
social services, etc
Demographic, court orders
Electronic
• Probation, Courts, and Department of Corrections have different systems
• Also centralized data system
• DOCSTARS
• CPAI (Correctional Programs Assessment Inventory)
• No evaluations of sex offender treatment programs in the community

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 113

Oklahoma Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill

Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes

Tools
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Available
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
State funding through Department of Corrections
Deportable detainees not prioritized because of limited slots
Males and females
• Not mandatory but could be sentenced with stipulation that if treatment is
completed ,he/she can be released onto probation early
• Program at medium male facility for developmentally disabled mentally ill
• Intermediate Mental Health Unit for those who are severely mentally ill—focuses
on stabilizing mental health
Voluntary
3,500 (estimate)
3%
4 facilities (2 male, 2 female)
• Males: 80
• Females: 10
100%
0%
• Male facilities: 1:20 or 1:40 depending on facility
• Female facilities: 1:10
• Males: 12-16 months
• Females: not available
12-16 months prior to release date
Cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal control, relapse prevention, contingency
planning, role plays, victim empathy (limited)
No
Polygraphs
Manualized
No
25% (estimate)
All staff, including community corrections staff, must be Licensed Professional
Counselors, Licensed Behavioral Practitioners, Licensed Clinical Social Workers
• Assess risk, develop case plans, and monitor treatment progress (assessment starts
in local jails before sending individuals to prison)
• Once in sex offender program, tools also inform treatment planning
• Psycho-social assessments, LSI-R, STATIC-99, Buss-Durkee, arousal checklists
• Collect information within programs on instruments to assess progress in treatment
• Department of Corrections collects program participation data (i.e., what kind of
treatment, when completed, what type of termination, etc), and demographics
Electronic
Department of Corrections
Survival analysis after release into community (both general offenders and sex
offenders)

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 114

REENTRY
Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria
Enrollment date
Services available
Case management

Yes
Yes
100% have at least some pre-release services
No
Specialized caseloads that work with other service providers and groups
All sex offenders
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Ensure that all inmates have identification, Medicaid, employment services
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 115

Oregon Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Not available
4,165 (official as of 3/08)
Not available
COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Males and females
Not available
Parole officers, Parole Board, Local Supervisory Authority decide on plans
State and mostly offender
4,322 (official as of 11/07)
Not available
Not available
Not available
99%, since treatment is ongoing
Not available
Not available
Not available
Numerous
Statewide
Not available
Not available
Not available—for each individual, completion occurs when supervision expires
Containment approach—partnership between parole officer, therapist, and
polygraphist
• Piloting Depo Provera, but very rarely used
• SSRIs are more commonly used
Polygraph testing is mandatory for every offender every 6 months and more often if
issues arise
Not available
Not applicable (no prison-based program)
5 years
Any data that is needed can be extracted
Electronic
Prison and community corrections share the same system
Evaluations of recidivism, success, etc
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility

Yes
Yes
Not available
Yes—National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community
(TPC) Initiative
Yes
Sex offenders with a score of 6 or higher on STATIC-99 are eligible for reentry

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 116

Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria
Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

services
Approximately 60
Not available
Not available
Yes
Not available
National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community
Department of Corrections and Community Corrections agencies
Determinate and indeterminate sentencing
At least 6 months prior to release date
Not available
Yes
• Parole officer—not prison case manager
• Exchange of information between managers
Not available
Not available
Yes
Not available
Not available
Not available
Housing, employment, education, release plan, program entry, participation in
cognitive programs, participation in alcohol/drug programs, program completion,
supervision completion
Not available
Oregon Department of Corrections
Not available
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for

Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Caseload

Yes
Community supervision is mandatory
Not available
Yes—for offenders classified as sexually violent and dangerous
Not available
Not available
Combination of state, local, levy, and offender funds (varies by county)
• Use of Stable/ACUTE tools began on 12/1/07
• Use of STATIC-99 began in 2004
Individuals sentenced for Sodomy I, Sex Abuse I, Rape I, Unlawful Sexual
Penetration (any degrees or attempts), Public Indecency, Private Indecency, and OnLine Corruption of a Child
Not available
Not available
• Stable/ACUTE sex offender assessment tool and STATIC-99
• Same tools used by parole and probation
Yes, generally
• Specialized training for officers
• Membership and participation in the Sex Offender Supervision Network, which
establishes statewide protocol—comprised of sex offender parole officers,
therapists, institution counselors, etc
Varies, but mostly below 60 (estimate)

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 117

Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
• 5-6 years for probation (official)
• 3 years for post-prison supervision (official)
Probation, parole, and post-prison supervision
Yes
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 118

Pennsylvania Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill

Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population

Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration

Enrollment date
Content

• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

• Available in all prison facilities excluding boot camp (26 total)
No
Not applicable
Department of Corrections standard for programming
State
Yes
Males and females
• Treatment program depends on level of functioning
• Special needs programming available for impaired offenders (including those with
mental retardation and other disabilities)
• Available to all sex offenders, including those with special needs
• Offenders placed in treatment based on willingness to participate
• Prioritize individuals who are closest to minimum expiration date
• About 14% of population (6,000) is serving time for a sex offense (estimate)
• At any given time 5,995-6,015 with a current sex offense (official)
• When factor in offenders with prior sex offenses, about 20% are sex offenders
(estimate)
• About 35-40% of sex offenders choose not to participate (usually those with short
sentences)
• At any given time, 20% in treatment
All (26)
• Varies by risk level of program
• Approximately 100 per program (1100 total at any given time)
Not available
Not available
1:300 (including non-sex offenders)
• Low risk: 9 months
• Moderate-high risk: 27 months
• Therapeutic community: 1 year
Standard is to start the number of months that program lasts before earliest release
date
• Use Medlin model
• 7 modules total—grounded in cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal control,
relapse prevention, etc
• Offender accumulates points based on quality of participation
• 2 levels of programming—one for moderate-high risk, one for low risk
• All 7 modules for moderate-high risk
• 3 modules for low risk
No
No
Manualized, although moving toward individualized in therapeutic communities
Treatment required for parole
50%
• Programming run by psychological services staff
• No certification required, but training program must be completed within 6 months
of start

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 119

Assessment
Purposes

• Get baseline risk with STATIC-99
• May adjust level depending on other risk factors not included in STATIC-99
STATIC-99

Tools
Data and Research
Type

• Tracks treatment participation, who is on waiting list, and who has refused
treatment
• Includes demographics, criminal history
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not yet

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans

Funding
Treatment providers
Number

Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment

Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance

Not available
Males and females
• Mandatory in some counties but not others
• Criteria for eligibility also varies by county
• All sex offenders referred for evaluation at state level and treatment if indicated by
evaluation
• Only state standards for treatment of sexually violent predators—set out by Sex
Offender Assessment Board (SOAB)
• Sexually violent predators required to attend treatment once a month for life
• SOAB standards call for collaborative effort between providers and case managers
• Aside from treatment for sexually violent predators, practices vary by county
• Mostly offender
• Some system-funded programs
The information below reflects only SOAB-approved programs for sexually violent
predators
• 25 providers approved by SOAB; some have programs in multiple counties, but
SOAB has not approved providers in all 67 counties
• Other providers treat sex offenders who are not sexually violent predators, but
SOAB is not authorized to audit these providers
Statewide
1 provider with waiting list
Not available
Not available
This information reflects only SOAB-approved programs
• All providers approved by SOAB use cognitive-behavioral therapy (standards
apply to both state and county supervision)
• Most have psychoeducational component and group modality
• 2-3 SOAB-approved programs have psychiatrists on staff so no need to collaborate
with anyone for medication administration
Yes, may be part of the program
Polygraph
Individualized
• Information exchange does not occur routinely, but prison and community
corrections treatment professionals are working to establish a system of filesharing to promote continuity of care
• Medlin model used in prison, but most community providers do not use it
Varies, about 18 months
Not available
Electronic
• SOAB has database of convicted sex offenders assessed since 1996
• Data is currently being transferred to web-based application hosted by the

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 120

Evaluation

Availability

Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?

Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding

Post-release services
Case management

o

• Supervision
Service coordination

Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage

Pennsylvania Justice Network
• This will allow for analysis of sex offender data
No
REENTRY
(Refers to state parole practices)
• Reentry courts in two counties (York and Lackawanna)—modeled after drug
courts
• Program will likely expand to other counties
Not available
Yes
Not available
Not available
Identified by Department of Corrections on “hard-to-place” list
All sex offenders are eligible
Not available
Not available
Not available
• No official state criteria
• Board of Probation and Parole works with Department of Corrections to maintain
unofficial standards
Board of Pardons and Parole and Department of Corrections
Board of Pardons and Parole and Department of Corrections
• State
• Philadelphia also has grant funding from Blueprint project for employment reentry
programming for medium and high risk offenders—building maintenance program
teaches vocational skills
• Transitional Coordinator Parole Agents supervise newly released state prison cases
for up to 90 days before they are transferred to general caseload—agents help with
transition to community supervision, parole condition compliance, accessing
benefits and finding employment
• Also Assessment, Sanctioning and Community Resource Agents—do not carry
caseloads are experts in assessments (LSI-R and STATIC-99), identify additional
community resources, ensure that graduated sanctions are utilized, and conduct
cognitive-behavioral education offender groups
Mainly parole but some state probation
• Parole agent becomes part of treatment team for offender
• Institutional parole agents provide information on treatment history and current
needs of offender to field parole supervision staff—to be used in Transitional
Accountability Plan
Some nonprofits in Philadelphia--mainly faith-based
In Philadelphia, most nonprofit service providers are faith-based
• Mainly mentoring
• Organization in Berks County that provides housing assistance
• Referrals for life skills cognitive-behavioral therapy program, anger management,
drug and alcohol treatment
• Parole is starting to do cognitive groups
• Crossroads Curriculum—offered by National Curriculum Training Institute
(NCTI) and approved by the American Probation and Parole Association
• Several Parole Agents trained and certified by NCTI to facilitate offender groups
in over 20 subject areas that include life skills, domestic violence, anger
management, felony offenses, etc
Assessments, supervision fees, treatment referrals, employment, housing stability,
technical parole violations, successful parole outcomes
Electronic

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 121

Maintenance
Evaluation

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding

Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes

Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Research Division of Parole Board
Not yet—but reports that track outcomes
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
(Refers to probation and parole)
Yes
Not mandatory—depends on sentence
Not available
Yes
Probation and Parole (state and county)
• State supervision is state-funded
• County supervision is county-funded
• County probation departments also have grant-in-aid from state
2000 (estimate)
All offenders
Low, medium, high, enhanced
• Classify offenders into risk levels and supervision levels
• Supervision staff can override assessment risk level recommendation, but sex
offenders cannot be supervised below medium level
• The supervision level directs number of contacts, urine tests, etc required each
month
STATIC-99, LSI-R
Yes
Sex offender protocol
50-60
• Trained by SOAB (part of Parole Board)
• Trained by Center for Sex Offender Management
Depends on sentence
Not available
Not available
Assessments, supervision fees, treatment referrals, employment, housing stability,
technical parole violations, successful parole outcomes
Electronic
Research Division of Parole Board
Not yet—but reports that track outcomes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 122

Rhode Island Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender

Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research

• Program in medium security facility, where most sex offenders serve majority of
sentence
• Due to staff limitations, intervention at other security levels is limited to program
orientation, evaluation, and time limited educational classes
Yes
Guidelines developed by Rhode Island Sex Offender Task Force/Center for Sex
Offender Management (CSOM) (based on Colorado guidelines)
Department of Corrections, Director of Behavioral Health
State
Yes
• Primarily males
• Not enough females to operate program
• Females who meet program criteria are provided individual time-limited
interventions if available
May participate if illness is managed
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders
• Some are ordered by sentencing court to attend sex offender treatment
• Parole Board guidelines require successful participation in treatment to qualify for
serious parole consideration
•
•
•
•

400 sentenced (estimate)
50 pre-trial (estimate)
84 slots available for ongoing treatment in medium security specialized unit
6 slots available in maximum security unit psychoeducational class

Not available
Not available
None
Not available
• 1 full-time provider
• Volunteer staff provide classes for program participants
Depends on severity of offense, criminal record, risk level, cooperativeness, progress,
length of sentence
As soon as space is available
Relapse prevention, cognitive distortion, identifying and changing interpersonal
contributing factors to crimes, assertiveness/skill building, etc
No–medication only available for mental illness
No
Individualized
• No—treatment is ongoing into community recovery
• For release, sex offender must demonstrate substantive change in contributing
factors to crimes and adequate level of awareness
• No formal completion
• Average number of parole releases per year is 6 (estimate)
No formal licensing or certification requirements
Not available
STATIC-99 used over course of program

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 123

Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Recidivism
Not available
Sex Offender Treatment Program (SOTP)
Not available
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Yes
Not available
Males and females
Not available
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available
Case management

Yes
Yes
Not available
Yes, - National Institute of Corrections Transition from Prison to the Community
(TPC) Initiative
No—awaiting approval for funding to provide reentry classes to sex offenders who
refuse to participate in Sex Offender Treatment Program
All offenders who participate in the Sex Offender Treatment Program are eligible
Not available
Not available
Not available
• Parole Board
• STATIC-00, Sex Offender Treatment Program reports factor into release
decisions
Approximately one year prior to release date
Not available
Yes—discharge planner
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration

Not available
Employment, education, housing, treatment, and other community needs
Yes—with discharge planners

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 124

South Carolina Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Available in one treatment facility
State
Yes
Males only
No
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders
• Available to all sex offenders who meet the following criteria:
o Offender must be within 5 years of release date
o Offender must be sentenced for an offense that is reviewable by the Sexual
Violent Predator Act
o Offender must be free in system for three years
o Offender must be able to read at a 5th grade level or higher
o Offender must be ambulatory (unit on 2nd floor–not wheelchair accessible)
o Offender’s mental health status must be stable
2,800 (estimate)
1.7%
1
46
100%
Not available
1:46
20 months (official)
36 months, average
• Phase 1: education
• Phase 2: cognitive-behavioral therapy (assault cycle groups, arousal
reconditioning, relationship skills, victim empathy, relapse prevention)
No
No
Manualized
No
70%
Bachelor’s degree and continuing training
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 125

South Dakota Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill

Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity

Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• 3 main facilities for adult males
• Available in women’s prison as well
• Standardized program but standards not legislatively mandated
• No Sex Offender Management Board
Not applicable
Not applicable
State
No
Males and females
• If person is mentally competent than can participate
• If person needs treatment for mental illness, that is prioritized over sex offender
treatment
• Special needs sex offenders are maintained
• Must be part of intensive treatment plan
• Both convicted sex offenders and cases that plead down from sex offenses are
screened for mandatory treatment
• Treatment excludes individuals on hold in Immigration and Customs Enforcement
facilities, individuals with a life sentence, single misdemeanor cases, individuals
with 6 years or longer between sex offenses
• 804 total (official as of 4/1/08)
• 493 convicted of sex offense, 311 who pleaded down from sex offense (official)
13%
4 (1 is women’s prison)
• 60 at low-medium (estimate)
• 30 at high-medium (estimate)
• 10 at maximum security (estimate)
0%
Not available
1:10
12 months (official)
12 months (official)
Not available
Not available
Polygraphs
Not available
No
Not available
Licensing is not required
To decide treatment regimen (low, moderate, high, and extreme)
LSI-R, ABEL, PSCAN
Demographics, crime codes, treatment completion, risk levels, info on victims, etc
Electronic
Sex Offender Management Program (SOMP)
Numbers are reported

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 126

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

No
Males and females
• Mandatory for sex offenders under community supervision if assessed as needing
it
• If current offense is sex offense, then offender will most likely be required to
attend treatment
• Department of Corrections (DOC) and SOMP decide eligibility
SOMP staff
State, offender
Not available
225
Not available
Not available
56%
Not available
7 providers—some provide services in more than 1 community
Statewide
Not available
Not available
36 of 225 completed as of last month
• Level 1—cognitive restructuring, relapse prevention, weekly groups, ABEL
assessment, polygraph monitoring, arousal control techniques, some GPS,
psychopharmacological and/or chemical interventions
• Level 2—cognitive restructuring, relapse prevention, weekly or biweekly groups,
polygraph monitoring
Yes
Polygraphs
Not available
Yes
36 months
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming

Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?

Yes
Yes
100%
Yes, through Department of Education
• Yes—through STOP program
• Modules include family history, sexual terminology, sexual anatomy and
diagramming, disclosure assignments
All sex offenders entering community are eligible
22 total
7 (technically on parole but still housed in prison)
15 (in minimum custody unit)
• Community Transition Program

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 127

Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Work with difficult to transition, those without families
• Teach basic survival skills (6 weeks of classroom education), then job assistance
through trustee facility
Not available
Department of Corrections, Board of Pardons and Parole, SOMP
State, grants
• Board of Pardons and Paroles
• Department of Corrections makes decisions for sex offenders not released onto
parole
• Release decisions based on risk level—assessed using LSI-R, RRASOR, STATIC99, ABEL, MnSOST-R
2 months prior to release date
• Depends on risk level and living situation upon release
• Alcohol/drug treatment, mental health, etc
Transitional case managers
• Parole services case manager—not same as prison case manager
• Prison case manager passes entire file to parole case manager upon release
Not available
Yes
No
Not applicable
Not applicable
• Individual and group counseling, polygraph testing, assessment, personality tests
• Available until discharge
Demographics, crime code, treatment compliance, treatment of days in contacting
treatment provider
Electronic—Parole Adult Tracking System (PATS)
Board of Pardons and Parole
Yes
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (Refers to Parole)

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision

Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Specialized caseloads

Yes
Supervision is mandatory
Not applicable
• Yes—all sex offenders are eligible
• Decisions not necessarily based on offense severity
• Some are under registration laws and residence laws for lifetime
Parole
225 on parole
State
Not available
All sex offenders
• Intensive, maximum, moderate, minimum, and paper only (just a monthly progress
report)
• Sex offenders can only get about mid range
Yes
To assess changes in risk level, classification
• ABEL, STATIC-99
• MnSOST-R
• Community Risk Assessment Scale
Some parole officers carry sex offenders on caseload, but retain non-sex offenders as

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 128

Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

well
Experienced staff
Not available
Additional training
5 years (estimate)
Group counseling, individual counseling, reassessments, polygraphs, mental health
services
Yes
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 129

Texas Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?

Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content

• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate
Provider certification

• Available in 3 facilities—2 male, 1 female
• Prisoners move from other facilities to specialized facilities for treatment
• 2 programs:
o 18-month intensive treatment
o 4-month education program for low risk offenders
Treatment standards have existed since the early 1990’s
• Council on Sex Offender Treatment (CSOT, 7-member board)
• Developed by cooperative effort of different agencies
• CSOT responsible for licensing sex offender treatment providers in the state
• CSOT—continual review process
• 3 revision processes since 1997, but no direct oversight of agencies
State
Yes, unless they have an order of deportation
Males and females
Ineligible if in special care facility, but otherwise eligible
• Offenders in minimum custody with a current sex offense
• If selected for treatment, it is required
•
•
•
•
•

26,121 with current sex offense (official as of July 2007)
34,078 with current or prior sex offense (official as of July 2007)
484 treatment beds
111 education beds
28 beds for female offenders

3 (1 women’s)
• Male prisons: 204 beds; 252 beds
• Female prison: 28 beds
100%
0%
1:25 (estimate)
• 18 months for treatment program
• 4 months for education program
Eligible within last 18-24 months before release date
• Accepting responsibility for deviant behavior, victim empathy, cognitivebehavioral therapy, relapse prevention
• Education program curriculum includes topics such as healthy sexuality, cognitive
restructuring, etc
No
No
General structure within which individual programs are created
Depends on offender release type—Board of Pardons and Parole may vote that
offender must successfully complete assigned treatment program in order to be
released by specified date
In last 2 fiscal years, 83% of offenders who entered treatment successfully completed
it or were still successfully completing treatment at time of treatment
• Must receive license—Department of Corrections has until 2010 to comply
• Must have another mental health license (Master’s level or higher)
• Must complete certain number of hours of specialized training

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 130

Assessment
Purposes

Tools

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

All sex offenders are assessed (including those in civil commitment)
• At treatment, used to get a snapshot of individual risk and needs
• At civil commitment, used to determine whether or not further evaluation is
needed
• In general, tools used for risk assessment
• At treatment—PAI (Personality Assessment Inventory—standardized for
incarcerated offenders), clinical interview, MnSOST, STATIC-99, MSI, Sex
offender incomplete sentence blank
• For registration—since 1999 Texas has used STATIC-99, but moving toward a
dynamic instrument that incorporates STATIC-99, PCLR (hair psychopathy
checklist), LSI-R
• All tools have been validated
Demographics, offense, evaluation, length of time in treatment, treatment
components, custody information, disciplinary issues
Electronic
Department of Corrections
Criminal Justice Policy Council study looks at impact of programming
State auditor’s report measures recidivism for sex offenders in treatment

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation, parole/mandatory supervision, and civil commitment)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs

Truth tests

Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research

Yes
Males and females
• Mandatory for all sex offenders under community supervision
• Texas is only state with outpatient civil commitment
State standardized plan tailored to individual needs
• Probation/Parole—offenders required to pay for services
• Civil commitment—Department of State Health Services
Not available
3,773 (official as of 10/2007)
Civil commitment—35 of 84 sexually violent predators being treatment in the
community
427 providers licensed by DSHS (must have license to treat sex offenders)
Statewide, but more providers in metropolitan areas than rural areas
0%
All have slots available
Not available
• State standard requires arousal control, cognitive-behavioral therapy, sexual
offense sequence and reoffense prevention, victim empathy, increasing social
competency, comorbid diagnosis, support system, adjunct therapy if needed
• Civil commitment employs assessments at onset and release using STATIC-99,
MnSOST-R, PCLR
• Biomedical approaches can be used (especially with sexually violent predators)
• SSRIs, Depo Provera used most frequently
• Chemical/physical castration used upon offender request
• 4 types of polygraph tests—Instant offense, maintenance, monitoring, sexual
history
• Plethysmographs used in civil commitment
Both—general state standard is individualized to offender needs
• Most sex offenders do not receive treatment in prison
• For those that have, there is an effort to make it continuous
Varies—average for probationer is 1 year to 4 years

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 131

Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not applicable
Not applicable
Agencies maintain own data
• 2005 legislation requires Council to study tools that best predict sex offender
recidivism
• Study based on probationers with sex offenses and 5-10 years of supervision
• Results should be available by 2009
REENTRY

Availability

Reentry programming for sex offenders limited to pre-release treatment
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (refers to probation and parole)

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Parole—depends on sentence
Not available
Yes, but only if offender gets lifetime sentence and is paroled
Probation (county-level) and parole (state-level)
• Probation—12,910 sex offenders as of 8/31/06
• Parole—see above
• Probation—county-funded
• Parole—state-funded
• Use STATIC-99 for classification until new system is in place
2003
• All sex offenders supervised on specialized caseload
• Risk assessment mandated for registration and supervision purposes
• 3 tiers (all higher than standard supervision):
• Low: 2 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts (treatment provider,
spouse)
• Medium: 3 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts
• High: 4 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts
• Also Super Intensive Supervision Program (SISP)—includes non-sex offenders as
well (requires 6 face-to-face contacts, 2 collateral contacts, monitoring
component—GPS, active or passive)
Registration and supervision
STATIC-99
Yes
Treatment, no contact with victim or children, no entry in child safety zones, no
entry, polygraph, other discretionary provisions
30:1 (40:1 for SISP)
• 40 hours of training (special training for SISP)
• No additional certification requirements
Not available
• Most required to attend treatment—halfway houses, education (for offenders
below certain education level)
• Referrals to substance abuse services, family violence services, etc.
Yes—between case manager, treatment provider, polygraph tester
Demographics, offense, conditions, etc.
Electronic
Parole Division has Offender Information Management System
Policy council does descriptive analysis

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 132

Utah Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate

Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes

Available in certain facilities
Yes
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA)
• Legislature and multi-disciplinary Sex Offender Task Force
• Prison programming staff oversees actual prison treatment programming
Not available
Yes, but depends on deportation status
Males and females (as needed for females)
Yes
• Mandatory for all sex offenders
• Small group of offenders (i.e. third degree felons) are assessed as not needing
treatment
1,860 (official as of 8/07)
Not available
1 prison, 1 county jail
• 222 currently enrolled
• 55 will be enrolled within next few months
1 (1,351 currently waiting, excluding those on INS and those not flagged yet)
Not available
1:232
12-18 months
18 months prior to release date
Cognitive-behavioral therapy (group only)
• Impulse control drugs can be administered, but are very rarely used
• Psychotropic drugs available for mental illness
No, but trying to implement polygraphs in prison
Both—core requirements for all, but therapist may tailor treatment to individual
Yes—unless determined as ready to continue in a less restrictive program
• 70 graduates in 2007
• Most who did not complete the treatment program still had their needs
successfully met
• Standards for treatment providers certified by Task Force—reviewed every 3 years
• Continuing training—10 hours per year minimum
To determine whether the offender is willing and ready for treatment, to determine
academic ability
• State-developed tool for pre-treatment assessment
• Plan to implement psychosexual evaluation

Tools

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans

Yes
Males and females
Not mandatory for all sex offenders, but almost all cases require evaluation and
treatment
• Usually the provider
• Court or Parole Board can order an “intensive” course of treatment for certain

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 133

Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

offenses
• Offender pays for private treatment
• If offender cannot afford to pay in private sector, there are a couple of state
programs in heavily populated areas (such as Salt Lake County) that can assist
842 (official)
725 (official)
Not available
About 100 licensed providers (estimate)
Statewide, but few in rural areas
Four half-way houses with inpatient sex offender programs are likely to have waiting
lists
Not available
Not available
• Cognitive-behavioral approach with relapse prevention
• Individual, group, and psychoeducational sessions
No, but psychotropic drugs are available for those with mental illness
Polygraphs required as part of treatment and community supervision
Individualized
Yes—prison providers complete a termination summary on progress of the offender
for community providers
18-36 months (estimate)
Basic data
Electronic
Utah Department of Corrections has F-Track system
Not available
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Yes
Yes
100%
• Participant in National Institute of Corrections study called Women Offender
Caseload Management Model (WOCMM) for female inmates
• Women’s prison has program called Your Parole Requires Extensive Preparation
(Y-PREP)
• Men’s and Women’s Summit groups incorporate services from community
programs and volunteer services across state
• Transition Parole Agents provide a higher level of service for parolees during first
90 days of release
Yes, initiative to lower recidivism
All offenders released onto parole
Not available
Not available
• State
• Offender pays for treatment in community whenever possible
• Utah Board of Pardons and Parole
• Release decisions based on Criminal History Assessment Matrix, severity of
crime, victims, time served, programming completed while incarcerated, good
behavior, assessment scores
• Assessment tools used are Criminal History Assessment Matrix, STATIC-99,
MnSOST-R

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 134

Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
•

Supervision

• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Release services begin 3-6 months prior to release date
If sex offender required to complete Community Correctional Center program,
offered transitional housing at Community Correctional Center
Institutional Parole Officers assigned 6 months prior to release
Transitional Parole Officers for 90 days (or until stable)—then transferred to standard
parole officers, halfway houses, intense supervised parole
Specialized parole officers—receive information in case file, programming
information, parole agreement, any disciplinary action, etc
Not available
Yes
10% of nonprofits that provide reentry services are faith-based (estimate)
Service provision
Housing, employment services, treatment programming, counseling
Information on recidivism
Electronic
Department of Corrections
Yes – to evaluate recidivism
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration

Yes
Not mandatory, but will be required in most cases
• Judges and Parole Board decide
• Have the option of requiring incarceration until end of sentence, but community
supervision is utilized in almost all cases
Option is available
• Probation—842 (official)
• Parole—725 (official)
State
Around 2003
All sex offenders
• Intensive, High, Moderate, Low
• All sex offenders are held to highest level of supervision for first year of
community supervision
• Reductions in standards may be requested after first year
Measure improvement in dynamic areas (work, personal relationships, treatment,
financial, etc)
• Assessed every 6 months with LSI (only measuring traditional risks, not sex
offender risk)
• Department of Corrections does not formally utilize any tool designed to measure
specific sexual risk
• Providers use own risk assessment tools
Yes
• Specific training in sex offender management
• Smaller caseloads
40-80, depending on location (estimate)
Ongoing training available in highly populated areas but not rural areas
• Probation—average of 36 months but ranges from 1 to 5 years (estimate)
• Parole—3 years to lifetime supervision (estimate)
Treatment with private providers or with state providers (for low income offenders)
Yes—parole officers work closely with individual and group therapists, other local

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 135

law enforcement, prosecutors, defense lawyers, victim reparations case managers,
social workers, Child Services workers, local government leaders, legislators, media,
community groups, sex offender registration authorities, etc
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Vehicle information, family, health, education status, DNA, scars/marks, date of
birth, legal status, employment
• Sex offender-specific data—nature of offense, age of victim, victim approach,
offense location, sexual behavior, physical description, voice sound, etc
• Electronic correctional databases—F-Track and O-Track
Department of Corrections
Yes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 136

Vermont Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?

Oversight by whom?

Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration

Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate

Provider certification

• Two facilities offer treatment for males—sex offenders transferred into these
facilities for treatment
• One facility for females
Yes
• No sex offender treatment board
• Program started in 1982 with inpatient treatment providers and some out-patient
treatment providers
• Department of Corrections has decision-making authority
• Covers correctional facilities, probation, parole (all are located in Department of
Corrections)
State
Yes—except for people who are about to be extradited
Males and females
• Participate in group treatment with non-mentally ill sex offenders
• Also individualized program for offenders who cannot handle group environment
• Must be convicted of sexual offense or sexually related offense, must take some
degree of responsibility for offense, must be open to treatment, and must not have
detainer
• Entry is prioritized by minimum release date
• Offenders are divided into 3 levels of programming based on risk/need:
o Low risk—6 months
o Moderate risk—12-18 months
o High/Violent—24-36 months
426 (official as of 6/30/07)
• 83 (estimate)
• Females on an as needed basis
• 2 male facilities
• 1 female facility
90 (total capacity for all 3 programs)
Not available
Not available
Varies by program—6.5 clinicians
• Low risk—6 months
• Moderate risk—14 months
• High/violent risk—24 months
Calculated by subtracting duration of treatment from minimum release date
Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, victim empathy, arousal
conditioning, etc
SSRIs and Luperon
No
Manualized
Corrections will not recommend parole at minimum release date unless treated
• Total completion rate since 1996 (all 3 levels): 69% (official)
• 2002 high risk—74%
• 2003 moderate risk—74%
All providers must have Master’s degree in social work/psychology, but no special
requirements for treating sex offenders.

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 137

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Risk assessment, treatment progress
• Risk assessed using RRASOR, STATIC-99, Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender
Risk (VASOR—state customized tool)
• For moderate-high risk sex offenders, also use PCLR (psychopathy checklist) for
intensive program (LSI of 23 or higher)
• Abel and Becker cognitive distortion scale, BURT rapist attitude scale, Michigan
alcohol screen test, Wilson sex fantasy questionnaire, penile plethysmograph
• Vermont also has state customized treatment progress scale for evaluating
dynamic factors

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Demographics, risk scores, treatment progress scores
Electronic and paper files
Department of Corrections
Community- and prison-based treatment evaluations
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment

Probation
Parole
Other CC
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Mandatory (98% of sex offenders on probation and 100% on parole required to
participate)
Yes
Males and females
Must take responsibility for the sexual offense
Provider determines risk level, but guidelines determine substance of program
Offender, insurance, state
601 (official as of 6/30/07)
52 (official as of 6/30/07)
Furlough status—109 (official as of 6/30/07)
• About 350 offenders in treatment at any given time (estimate)
• A lot of offenders have completed treatment and remain on supervision so this
does not reflect the percentage of supervisees that participate in treatment
Not available
Not available
Not available
12 (estimate)
Statewide
0%
0%
Not available
Same as prison treatment
Yes
Polygraph used to determine compliance with supervision requirements
Manualized
Yes
24 months followed by 1 year of aftercare (for both probationers and parolees)
Same as prison-based treatment
Electronic and paper
Department of Corrections
Yes
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release

Yes
Yes (but no halfway houses for sex offenders)

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 138

Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria
Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
o Supervision
o Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
o Faith-based
o Role
Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

100%
Not available
Yes—Community Justice Program, but no longer funded
• Any sex offender who has gone through treatment is eligible
• 94 on furlough in June 2007
Not available
Not available
All programs are same
Department of Corrections
Department of Corrections
State
Department of Corrections has authority to release on furlough
6 months prior to anticipated release date
• Main focus is to develop social support system
• Also housing, employment services
• Case manager assigned at intake
• Each prison has a designated case manager
Probation/parole officers—collaborate with prison case manager
Probation/parole officers
Not available
Some
Yes
Service providers (some have shelters)
• Housing, social support, rehabilitation services
• No halfway houses—Department of Corrections funding can be used to help with
initial housing costs if necessary
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length

Yes
Mandatory for all sex offenders
Not applicable
Yes—determined by court
Probation and parole (parole officers supervise furlough)
Not available
State
Not available
Not available
Low-moderate, moderate-high, high
Assess risk, treatment progress
Same tools used as in prison-based treatment
Yes
Polygraph, but no GPS or electronic monitoring
Not available
Specialized training
Varies

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 139

Services

Collaboration

• Housing, social support, rehabilitation services
• No halfway houses, but Department of Corrections funding can be used to help
with initial housing costs if necessary
Not available

Virginia Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?

• One intensive residential treatment program for medium to high risk sex offenders
(SORT)
• 15 designated sites provide less intensive services
No
Not applicable

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 140

Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders

Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
•

Drugs

• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate

Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes

Tools

Department of Corrections (DOC)
• Residential program is on a specific legislative budget
• The rest is funded by DOC
Yes
• Only males have access to residential treatment
• Limited treatment for females
Screened for stability before entering treatment
• Intensive program—eligibility based on time in system, medium to high risk of
re-offense, behavior record
• Other programs—everyone is screened
• Once eligible, treatment is compulsory—lose ability to earn good time if refuse
3,500 (estimate)
• 20% in some sort of programming (estimate)
• Probably only 5% in sex offender-specific programming (estimate)
16
• SORT—78 active, 42 pending
• Other programs—8-12 per group, 1 group per facility
100% (estimate)
0% (estimate)
• SORT– 1:11 (includes mental health professionals, social workers, risk
assessment administrators)
• Varies for other programs
• SORT–2-3 years (estimate), with maximum of 6 years
• Other programs–up to one year, but new groups will be 12-18 weeks
• SORT–preference is to begin 3-6 years before release date
• Other programs vary
SORT—relapse prevention, covert sensitization, cognitive-behavioral therapy,
arousal control
• Only in SORT—use SSRIs, but not very often (only 4 of 52 admissions in 2007
received SSRIs)
Polygraphs used only in SORT
SORT is individualized
Not available
• 62% in 2007
• Of 50 discharged cases—1 administrative removal, 28 paroled, 4 refused
programming, 11 treatment removals/expulsions, 3 removals for security reasons,
3 sexually violent predators were civilly committed
• Qualified Mental Health Practitioners
• In general, master’s level education
• If working with sex offenders, must be state-certified (or working on it), or under
the supervision of someone who is certified
• Must be certified within a year of start date in residential program
• Department of Corrections has American Correctional Association standards as
well –40 hours of training a year
• SORT—pre-screening to assess risk level
• If medium to high risk, assessed for risk and needs
• Other programs—to prioritize cases, assess sexual interest
• Some clinical override allowed
• SORT—Stable (but staff only use as guideline)
• Other programs—STATIC-99, LSI-R, MSI, MMPI

Data and Research
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 141

Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
Electronic
Department of Research and Development
Process evaluation on SORT
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes—but most of the time they would be detained by Immigration and Customs
Enforcement
Males and females
Most sex offenders must successfully complete treatment as a condition of their
probation
Parole officer and treatment provider make treatment decisions, sometimes with
input from others
• DOC
• Co-pay from offenders in some districts
2,400 as of March 4, 2008 (estimate)
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
New contract began in October 2007—26 providers on contract
Statewide
Some
Not available
Not available
Cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse prevention
No
Polygraphs
• Treatment plans should be individualized
• Some group treatment is manualized
Only one prison treatment program (SORT)—if individual released from SORT then
community treatment is consistent
Varies
Yes
Electronic
DOC—Research and Evaluation Department
Some analysis in containment sites
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services

Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility

Yes
Yes–most are provided by non-governmental agencies through Department of
Criminal Justice Services funding
• All have programming to an extent
• Productive Citizenship offered in all facilities but there are waiting lists so not all
inmates will receive it
• Virginia Reentry Policy Academy (established in June 2006)
• Outgrowth of work with National Governor’s Association
No
All sex offenders are eligible

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 142

Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management
o Supervision
o Service coordination

Nonprofit involvement
o Faith-based
o Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
Not available
Not available
No–but under development by the Sex Offender Steering Committee (SOSC)
Not applicable
Not applicable
Pre-release—State general funds
Post-release—Department of Criminal Justice Services
• For those sentenced pre-1995, Parole Board is releasing authority
• Offenders sentenced since 1995—released by DOC when time completed
• Upon release, sex offenders are assessed using the STATIC-99 to determine
whether or not they should be considered for civil commitment
• Depends on availability
• Want to begin prioritizing people who are near release date
• Productive Citizenship curriculum has 15 sessions—general introduction,
communication and problem solving, values, dealing with emotion, healthy living,
healthy sexuality, employment, banking and money management, securing
housing and transportation, family matter, active parenting, family legal issues,
substance abuse, resources ad referral, and making it on supervision
• Breaking Barriers workshop—based on cognitive-behavioral model
• Sex Offender Awareness Program (SOAP)–15-session psychoeducational
program offered at designated sites
Institutional counselors assigned at admission
Containment model in 17 sites
District parole officer—works with other agencies
• Collaboration on home plan for sex offender—counselor sends updated home
plan to parole officer through community release unit
• Also 5 reentry specialists who work in institution and community setting
Yes
DOC may contract with faith-based services if they comply with program standards
Provide referrals to other agencies–mainly for employment services (interview skills,
life skills, help purchase job-related equipment, transportation, etc.)
See above
• Offender-Based State Correctional Information System contains data on program
participation
• EIS is where counselors enter home plans
• In process of developing a system that interfaces data between agencies
Electronic
DOC
Research and Management Section does some analysis
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated

Yes
Majority of sex offenders are under some type of supervision
• Determined at sentencing
• Parole was abolished in 1999—majority of currently supervised sex offenders
entered supervision since them
No
Probation and Parole
2,400
DOC
Not based on risk
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 143

Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload

Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not available
Not available
Assess risk
All sex offenders released from prison with a predicate offense for Civil
Commitment are assessed using the STATIC-99
In some larger districts
Not available
• Varies by district
• Senior should carry no more than 24 cases
• Field officers should carry no more than 40 cases
Required to complete courses that include Introduction to Supervision of Sex
Offenders, Supervision Practices in the Community, Self-Defense
5 years average (estimate)
Substance abuse services, sex offender treatment, polygraph, job training
Yes
Yes
Electronic
DOC–Research and Evaluation Department
As described above

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 144

Washington, DC
Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility

Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other CC
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other CC
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment

Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Yes
Males and females
• Not mandatory
• Decisions about treatment are based on assessments of risk and needs
• All offenders are referred for assessment with a provider based on criminal
history and the provider assesses whether or not treatment is necessary
Federal funding
500 on probation and parole (estimate)

65-70% (estimate)

Three contracted providers
Not available
0%
0%
Not available
• Supervise under containment model including supervision, treatment, monitoring
and polygraph
• Cognitive behavioral treatment
• Provider services must be consistent with Association for the Treatment of Sexual
Abusers and Center for Sex Offender Management approach
Available on an as needed basis but not widely used
Polygraphs used in assessment and throughout treatment process
Individualized
• Limited information from Bureau of Prisons
• Court Services Offender Supervision Agency starts fresh with their own
assessments and treatment plans
18-24 months
• Collect information on demographics
• Beginning to track treatment characteristics
Electronic
Court Services Offender Supervision Agency
None
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability

Eligibility

Criteria for decisions

• Court Services Offender Supervision Agency supervises all offenders placed on
probation by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
• Parole pursuant to the District of Columbia Code
• Not mandatory, depends on sentencing
• If probation case does not finish treatment, there is the option of getting probation
extended to complete treatment
Judicial discretion

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 145

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions

Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services

Collaboration

• Probation: 5 year limit
• Lifetime supervision is an option for parole
Court Services Offender Supervision Agency supervises all offenders placed on
probation
500 on probation and parole (estimate)
Federal funding (refers to adult probation and parole only)
District of Columbia has its own auto screener since 2004 (for risk and needs)
All sex offenders
Two different systems:
• For registration: A, B, C, D
• For supervision: Intensive, Maximum, Medium, or Minimum
For registration and supervision
• Auto screener looks at dynamic and static needs
• It is in the process of being validated
Yes
• Global Positioning System (GPS), Electronic Monitoring, computer search
conditions, special conditions around contact with minors
• Conditions vary by releasing authority or based on assessment outcome
• No standardized list
1:25
Receive special training
• Probation: 2 years (estimate)
• Parole: 5 years (estimate)
• Vocational Occupation Unit provides GED, vocational skills, life skills, domestic
violence treatment
• Treatment referred to outside agency
• Mental health services provide through the Department of Mental Health
Yes

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 146

Washington Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content

o

Drugs

o Truth tests
o Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release

Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research

No management board—but standard in place for programs and outcomes measured
Not applicable
Not applicable
Legislature
Available for all sex offenders but not all sex offenders receive treatment due to
limited resources
Yes
Male and females
Available to them but they are not required to participate
• Decisions about who to place in treatment are based on risk assessment scores on
RRASOR, MnSOST-R, and STATIC-99
• Offender must also have minimum of 12 months left to serve
3,187 of 18,209 state prisoners (17.5%) were sentenced for sex offenses (official)
• 200 active treatment beds full for males
• 8-10 women in treatment
• Treatment extends outside of prison as well—currently about 15% of the total
treatment population is still in prison (official)
Two (one male, one female)
• 200 for males
• 8-10 for females
Both prisons have a waiting list
0%
1:13 (official)
13 months average (for both males and females)
20 months prior to earliest release date (official)
• Relapse prevention, cognitive-behavioral therapy, arousal reconditioning, victim
empathy (limited), plethysmograph
• Both group and individual treatment
• Intake plans based on risk and needs
Medication provided when necessary, but not through sex offender treatment
program
No polygraphs
Individualized
• Offenders under the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board (ISRB) are required to
attend treatment, but other sex offenders are not
• For sex offenders in general, participation in treatment may influence parole
board decision
92% (official)
• No certification or registration requirement for treatment providers, but it may
come up in legislation this year
• Currently there are minimum qualifications which reflect community standards
for certified sex offender providers
• Prioritize individuals for treatment
• Identify notification level for each offender
LSI-R, STATIC-99, RRASOR, MnSOST-R

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 147

Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Demographics, completion rates, time in treatment—mainly for tracking purposes
Electronic
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Washington State Institute for Public Policy conducts evaluations for the state
TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)

Availability

Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number

Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality

Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

3 types of community-based treatment:
1. Treatment continues from prison in DOC program
2. Treatment by private providers paid for by DOC
3. Treatment by private providers paid for by offender
Yes—unless deported
Males and females
• If treated in prison, expected to continue treatment in the community
• Most offenders have treatment as stipulation in sentence
Provider makes decisions about length of treatment, etc.
Three streams:
1. Legislative funding to continue with prison treatment program
2. DOC funding for treatment from private providers
3. Offenders pay on their own
Probation and parole are consolidated
Not applicable
Not applicable
Community Corrections—3,344 of 27,650 cases (12.1%) are sex offenders (estimate)
Not applicable
Not applicable
30% (estimate)
• Private providers must be certified to serve sex offenders
• Also must have continuing education, tests, etc
• For DOC program that continues from prison treatment—eight state staff with one
supervisor
• Private providers are numerous
Statewide
Not available
Not available
Not available
• For DOC program that continues from prison treatment—content is same as in
prison
• Content varies among private providers (applies to all subheadings in this
category)
No drugs for DOC program
DOC uses polygraph and plethysmograph
DOC is individualized
Yes (for DOC program)
23 months (estimate)
See prison-based treatment
See prison-based treatment
See prison-based treatment
See prison-based treatment
See prison-based treatment
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services

Yes
Yes
Every facility offers some reentry programming

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 148

Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date

Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management

Supervision
o Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
o Faith-based
o Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

• Legislature and DOC each have an initiative—DOC initiative is called The
Reentry Initiative
• DOC recently received $25 million from the legislature to enhance services and
change reentry programming
General reentry programming applies to sex offenders, but there is a special focus on
better managing sex offenders
All offenders
Not available
Not available
Yes—in development
DOC
DOC, legislature
Legislative funding
• 2 authorities:
1. DOC
2. ISRB—has jurisdiction over some offenders with offenses prior to 1984 (only
about 140 offenders left in system)
• In 2001 new legislation created determinate-plus sentencing for persistent sex
offenders—ISRB determines release for these offenders based on instruments
listed in prison section and polygraph test
• In theory, pre-release programming starts the day the offender begins his/her
sentence
• Mandated to start as early as 2 years prior to release
• Life skills, job assistance, family services, substance abuse services, mental health
programming
• Content of programming varies by the security level of the facility—maximum
security prisons focus more on violence reduction
• Family-based programming is restricted in certain situations
• Classification counselors assigned in prison
• Assigned 18-20 months before earliest release date
• Community Corrections officer manages post-release cases
• Some service providers come into prison to work with offender 6-12 months
before release, and they continue after release as well (this includes treatment
providers, reentry specialists, mental health providers)
Community Corrections/Parole
• Information sharing between pre- and post-prison case managers
• Providers coordinate services
Yes
At least half of nonprofits who provide reentry services are faith-based (estimate)
• Sexual assault advocates—involved in placement and reentry
• Others offer specific services, including housing services
Same services that are available to all offenders—life skills, chemical dependency,
resume development, etc
Starting to collect data on new reentry initiative—but data is limited at this point
DOC
Electronic
Not available
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Yes
• Depends on when they were sentenced
• Offenders sentenced after 1990 are supervised post-release

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 149

Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for

Risk levels

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads

Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type

Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Not applicable
Yes
Community Corrections (Probation/Parole)—supervises only felons
3,333 sex offenders (7.8% of total population) (official)
Legislature
There will be new risk instrument in the spring of 2008
• All sex offenders coming from institutions into the community
• Classification also required for sex offenders who go straight onto probation, but
done by local law enforcement
• Notification:
Level 1: in-family offender, information not released to media, just local law
enforcement
Level 2: moderate risk—can be released on statewide registry
Level 3: high risk—media release, direct mailings
• Cutpoints for each level are based on actuarial assessments (LSI-R, MnSOST-R,
RRASOR, STATIC-99)
Risk classification, registration and notification requirements, determine who is
predatory
Same tools as in prison
• In urban areas, where populations are more dense, they have specialized caseloads
• No specialized caseloads in rural areas because not enough sex offenders under
supervision
More supervision, GPS
Varies
No additional certification—but sex offender supervisors receive additional training
• Three years on average (official number)
• Determinate-plus cases will be lifetime supervision
Treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy, mental health programs, job services, life
skills
Yes
• Monitoring and tracking data available
• Trying to supplement this data with acute information on homelessness, etc.
(collected through hand surveys)
DOC
Electronic
Yes—through Government Accountability and Performance program

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 150

West Virginia Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility
Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration

Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Standard being developed by Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR)
in compliance with the Child Protective Act passed in 10/06
Not applicable
Not applicable
Through contract services
Available for all sex offenders
Yes
Males and females
Yes
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders
• Phase 1 recommended for all sex offenders as part of Individualized Program Plan
5,869 (estimate)
Not available
8 (official, Department of Programs)
12 (official, Program Mentor/Department in-house standard from programming)
90% (estimate)
10% (estimate)
1:12 (estimate)
4 phases
• Phase 2: ongoing until granted parole or within 6 months of discharge
• Phase 3: starts when granted parole within mandatory holding period or when
offender is within 6 months of discharging sentence
Over one year—often more (estimate)
Cognitive behavioral therapy, arousal control, victim empathy, sexual education,
social skills, anger management, legal issues including registry requirements,
motivation for offense
No
No
Manualized
No
46.9% (official, 2006-2007 Annual Report)
• Provider must be employed by West Virginia Department of Corrections or
contracted service provider
• Department of Corrections certifies providers
• Includes continuing review
• Includes continuing training—all providers must attend mandatory 32 hours
annual training and are encouraged to attend the 2 day follow-up retreat
Sex offenders not assessed for treatment—assessed during classification
For inclusion in psychological evaluation
RRASOR, MnSOST
Enrollment/completion stats
Electronic
West Virginia Department of Corrections
None

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 151

Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding

Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number
Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration

Yes
Males and females
Mandatory for all sex offenders until released by provider
Contract providers
• Sex offender management fund
• Supervision fees
• Private pay
(Following numbers are for Department of Corrections only)
49 (estimate)
77 (estimate)
Not applicable
100% of those supervised by Department of Corrections
100%
100%
Not applicable
Exact number not available—Department of Corrections employs 7 contract
providers
Localized, only available in larger cities
None (official, contractual documents)
None (official, contractual documents)
Not available
No
Yes
Not available
Yes
2 years in parole, could be longer if they do not successfully complete the program
REENTRY

Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives
Specialized sex offender programming
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria
Enrollment date
Services available
Case management
Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Yes
100%
No
No
• West Virginia Parole Board
• Criteria decision based on criminal history and behavior while in prison
6 months
Three levels of sex offender classes offered
All prisoners are assigned case workers, whether they take programming or not
If on parole, then parole officers
Not available
Not available
Yes
Not available
Medical issues, mentoring
While on parole, they can get sex offender counseling
Yes
Program attendance
Electronic
Department of Corrections
Not available

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 152

COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
Availability
Eligibility
Criteria for decisions

Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population

Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Not mandatory
• No supervision for prisoners who discharge their sentences
• West Virginia State Judges or those states sending offenders to West Virginia
decide
Yes, for sexually violent predators
Enhanced supervision, electronic monitoring, polygraph, treatment
• Total: 126
• Probation: 49 (estimate)
• Parole: 77 (estimate)
Sex offender management fund, parole supervision fees collected
Yes
• Implemented 2006
• Modified August 2007
All
Low, moderate, high
Yes
Assess risk and treatment
SOTNPS by treatment provider
Yes
Increased contacts, electronic monitoring, polygraph, mandated treatment
35-40, estimate
Electronic monitoring, sex offender policy
2 years (estimate)
Treatment and counseling either by agency contracted staff or private pay providers
Yes
Records of polygraphs and results, electronic monitoring duration, treatment and
completion
Electronic
Department of Corrections for Department of Corrections offenders
Yes, evaluation compliance to sex offender specific laws and policy

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 153

Wisconsin Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability
State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility

Noncitizens
Gender
Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility
Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment

Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content
• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes, in certain facilities (treatment and program facilities)
Yes
Not available
Not available
State
• Not available for all sex offenders
• For some, recommend lower level of treatment in community (i.e. education, aftercare); higher risk offenders are eligible
Yes
Males and females
Not required
• Recommended for some
• Sex offenders have the option of refusing
As of April 18, 2008, 4,600, or 20-25% of prison population for hands-on offense
(estimate)
• About 12% (based on official data but estimate)
• Does not count people who are in for life sentences (treatment only starts within
last 5 years of sentence) or offenders who refuse treatment
8 facilities
12 offenders per program—there may be multiple programs per facility
100%
0%
1:6 (2:12)
From 6 months to 2 years
• Shorter term: within about 36 months
• Longer term: within about 5 years before sentence is complete
Cognitive behavioral therapy, Thornton’s approach
No, though psychotropics available to treat mental illness
Yes, polygraphs in 2 of the programs (both are from long term programs)
Manualized
No
• Short term: 80-85%
• Long term: 80%
None required
To determine risk level and pervasiveness—this will determine course of treatment
(short term versus long term)
None—in house assessment procedure based on PRASOR and STATIC-99
Varies between programs
Varies between programs
Varies between programs
Margaret Alexander, 1999
REENTRY

Availability

• Reentry is a philosophy—not a program
• Technically, everything the Department does from the point of intake through
discharge is to prepare offenders for reentry

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 154

Pre-release

Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services

Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming

Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?

Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management

• Pre-release curriculum offered to all inmates
o Has 10 modules: wellness, health, personal development, family support,
education, employment, financial literacy, housing, transportation,
transitional preparation
• Provides inmates with portfolios to store critical documents (resumes,
identification, etc.)
• 5 year strategic business plan: assessment, case planning, program and
intervention, data collection and measurement, and organization and philosophy
Yes
• 100%
• Approximately 23,000 adult males (unified correction system; includes total
inmate population male and female adults—sex offenders comprise 20% of total
population)
• Reentry Initiative
• Strategic Business Plan (what we need to do for next 5 years)
• Initiatives with Department of Transportation
• Department of Health and Family Services – focusing on specific population like
women with children
• Department of Workforce Development,
• Process for offenders to apply for food share benefits, mentor programs,
identification programs, linkages to Social Security Administration (SSA), driver’s
license initiatives, employment programs, etc.
• Public information document
• Services individualized for inmates based on risk and need
• Curriculum offered to sex offenders but are tailored to sex offender risk and needs
• Notification and registration services provided
Everyone eligible
100% of sex offenders are in reentry programs
Not available
Not available
• Policies and procedures cover both institution and community corrections
• Relationship with SSA, Department of Veteran Affairs—there are standards for all
treatment programs in institutions
• Some are Executive Directives from Secretary of Department, Administrator of
Adult Institutions, Community Corrections Administrative Directives, signed by
administrator
Varies
Varies
State, volunteer partnerships, federal grants (no funding for sex offenders through
federal grants)
• Parole Commission (under old law) and courts (with the passing of truth in
sentencing)
• Criteria based on release dates
• Tools used: RRASOR, STATIC-99, MnSOST
At intake
• Drug treatment, housing, cognitive behavioral therapy, sex offender treatment
program
• Evidenced-based practices—intensive sex offender treatment
• Intervention strategies geared towards relapse prevention related to directing
prisoner to reentry
• All treatment is centered around relapse prevention
• All inmates have social workers
• All inmates not released via Maximum Discharge have agent assigned to them
upon release
• Multidisciplinary team managing

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 155

Post-release services
Case management
• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Case managers
Exchange of information
Yes
Yes
Not available
Varies
Group therapy, individual therapy, sex education/sexual values clarification/sexual
dysfunction prevention, social skills training, assertiveness training, cognitive
restructuring, victim impact/victimization awareness, covert sensitization,
masturbatory satiation, relapse prevention.
Yes
Demographics, case, assessment, criminal history, sex offender registry, psychosocial
Not available
Not available
Yes
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population

Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Yes
• Not mandatory—under old law, some offenders come out on parole upon
completing sentence
• Under new law there is always a period of supervision
Not available
• Yes, law passed in 1997
• Some based on conviction
• 5,093 under active supervision and on registry
• Sex offenders supervised based on behavior, not on registry
• 7,200 are sex offenders—in those not just required to register
• Probation: 3 out of 4
• Parole: 1 out of 4
State
Only type of classification is notification levels (only certain sex offenders require
notification)
Not available
Not available
Not available
Supervision and risk of reoffending
RRASOR, STATIC-99, MnSOST

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 156

Wyoming Sex Offender
Treatment & Reentry Programs
TREATMENT—PRISON-BASED
Availability

State standard
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Eligibility

Noncitizens
Gender

Mentally ill
Criteria for eligibility

Population
Sex offenders in prison population
Percentage in treatment
Programs
Prisons with programs available
Average capacity
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Average ratio of providers/offenders
Average duration
Enrollment date
Content

• Drugs
• Truth tests
• Individualized vs. manualized
Treatment requirement for release
Completion rate
Provider certification

• Yes—at male facilities
• No discrete female sex offender treatment program because of low numbers
• Evaluation is only service available at women’s prison
Association for Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA)
Wyoming Department of Corrections
Wyoming Department of Corrections
• Available for all sex offenders
• Some sex offenders are incarcerated in out-of-state facilities—treatment is not
available for those offenders incarcerated out-of-state
Yes (if Immigration and Customs Enforcement does not immediately pick them up)
• Males are eligible
• Evaluation only for females, and on individualized bases due to mental health
evaluation
• For female offenders, parole has requirement to seek treatment
Yes—with consultation with mental health staff and ongoing coordination
• Not mandatory for all sex offenders—only if they are assessed as needing it is
treatment required
• Criteria not necessarily based on index offense (i.e. if convicted of sex offense in
past, then evaluated through sex offender specific evaluation—includes STATIC99)
• If offenders refuse, it affects their parole status
355 (official from MIS based on sentencing and treatment data)
33%
3 (official)
Total between 210 and 230 (the 3 facilities have capacity for 75, 60, and 75)
0%
0%
• About 1:55 in one facility
• 1:35 at other facility
About 24 months
Within 2 years of projected release date
Cognitive behavioral therapy, relapse prevention, workbook component, core
treatment component, reentry transition stage, Robert Longo workbook (Who am I
and Why am I in Treatment), understanding offense cycle, relapse prevention
planning, release planning, victim empathy, work issues, men’s identity issues,
domestic violence, managing stress, substance abuse, human sexuality
No; psychotropics available to treat mental illness
Yes – polygraphs and plethysmograph
Manualized
Technically no, but does affect parole status
Not available
• No legislatively created standard
• Requirements: advanced degrees, license, background, 2,000 hours of sex offender
clinical experience, 500 hours in sex offender specific evaluation, 1,000 hours in
sex offender specific provision of treatment
• Continuing training: 40 hours of sex offender specific continuing education per
year

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 157

Assessment
Purposes
Tools

Assess risk and treatment need
• STATIC-99, intake interview, structured clinical interview, official version of
crime, NCIC checks
• General: memory, reading test, head injury; ABEL screen, plethysmograph,
polygraph, HARE, MILAN, California Psychological Inventory, WAIS, etc
• No data specific sex offender information collected
• Currently implementing new probation and parole database
Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment
• Electronic
• Paper files for specific sex offender information
Wyoming Department of Corrections
• Generally, yes—no sex offender specific
• 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender

Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

TREATMENT—COMMUNITY BASED (Refers to treatment on probation and parole)
Availability
Noncitizens
Gender
Criteria for eligibility
Individualized treatment plans
Funding
Population
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Percentage in treatment
Probation
Parole
Other community corrections
Treatment providers
Number

Distribution
Percentage with waiting list
Percentage with 25% empty slots
Completion rate
Treatment modality
Drugs
Truth tests
Individualized vs. manualized
Continuity of treatment
Average duration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Available, however sex offender specific treatment is not readily available in all
districts (depends on rural areas, population, service availability)
Yes
Males and females
• Not mandatory for sex offender under community supervision
• Judge makes determination
Developed by mental health provider in conjunction with supervising agency
Offenders are responsible for payment—based on sliding scale
245 (official, by field count)
50 (official, by field count)
Not applicable
61.6% (official)
58% (official)
Not applicable
• 15 have sex offender specific treatment programs, operational and localized and
associated with community mental health centers
• Official number, internal survey
Localized and associated with community mental health centers
Not available
Not available
Not available
• Group/individual treatment options
• Sex offender treatment are usually individual treatment
No drugs administered, though psychotropics available to treat mental illness
Yes
Individualized
Yes, available upon parole plan
Not available
• No data specific sex offender information collected
• Currently implementing new probation and parole database
Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment
• Electronic
• Paper files for specific sex offender information
Wyoming Department of Corrections
• Generally, yes—no sex offender specific
• 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 158

REENTRY
Availability
Pre-release
Post-release
Percentage of state prisons with services
Specific initiatives

Specialized sex offender programming
Eligibility
Population
• Pre-release
• Post-release
State standard?
Developed by whom?
Oversight by whom?
Funding
Pre-release programming
Releasing authority and criteria

Enrollment date
Services available

Case management
Post-release services
Case management

• Supervision
• Service coordination
Nonprofit involvement
• Faith-based
• Role
Services available
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

Yes
Yes
100% (3 facilities)
• Series of Violent Offenders and Prisoner Reentry
• Housing placement and additional forensic evaluation for higher risk
• Several staff initiatives developed as result of first 2 initiatives—really identifying
higher risk offenders, specifically sex offender population
Yes
• Technically all are eligible for parole, based on need
• Prioritize high risk and high need
Not available
Not available
Not available
No, but guidelines developed
Not applicable
Not applicable
State and federal grants
• Wyoming Parole Board
• Criteria: served appropriate amount of sentence, demonstrated adaptive changes
• Assessment tools: STATIC-99, COMPASS, status reports
At least 1 year prior to reentry
Reentry specific programming (housing, vocational, facilitating continuity of formal
treatment programs – substance abuse, mental health treatment, identification cards,
SSI, rehabilitation)
Yes, for higher risk they have an additional higher risk case manager
• Upon release, field services (if have additional parole), if they do not have parole
but have needs in community then provide connections to community providers,
but not necessarily followed up
• Joint reentry initiative—Department of Health and Department of Corrections—
serious and mentally ill offenders identified a year out, ongoing case management,
representative of Department of Health, services maintained
• Department of Health follows offenders for 3 months after
No prison case manager
Yes, exchange of information
Yes
Very small percentage (maybe 5%)
Direct service provision
Mental health, substance abuse, sex offender treatment, job service
• No data specific sex offender information collected
• Currently implementing new probation and parole database
Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment
• Electronic
• Paper files for specific sex offender information
Wyoming Department of Corrections
• Generally, yes—no sex offender specific
• 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender
COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

Availability
Eligibility

Yes
Community supervision not mandatory

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 159

Criteria for decisions
Lifetime supervision
Supervising agencies
Population
Funding
Classification system
Year implemented/updated
Required for
Risk levels
Assessment
Purposes
Tools
Specialized caseloads
Provisions
Caseload
Supervisor requirements
Supervision
Length
Services
Collaboration
Data and Research
Type
Storage
Maintenance
Evaluation

•
•
•
•

Made by local district court
Department of Corrections Field Services make pre-sentence reports
Yes
Based upon offense and determined by sentencing court

• Probation: 245 (official)
• Parole: 50 (official)
State
Sex offender specific instrument—effective 2007
All, unless sex offense is not classified offense—would not be required to be
supervised
High, medium and low
Yes
Supervision strategy
• Jackson County, STATIC-99, psychosexual evaluation, COMPAS
• Jackson County and COMPAS also used by parole/probation
• Not across department
• In 2 offices, but these also have regular cases on caseload
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
• Sex offender specific treatment not available in all areas of Wyoming
• Based on low population, service availability, size of state
Yes
• No data specific sex offender information collected
• Currently implementing new probation and parole database
Basic demographic, treatment involvement, response to treatment
• Electronic
• Paper files for specific sex offender information
Wyoming Department of Corrections
• Generally, yes—no sex offender specific
• 2000/2001 needs assessment done for sex offender

Treatment and Reentry Practices for Sex Offenders

Vera Institute of Justice 160