NCJ Number
189677
Journal
Corrections Management Quarterly Volume: 5 Issue: 3 Dated: Summer 2001 Pages: 46-51
Editor(s)
Stephanie Neuben
Date Published
2001
Length
6 pages
Annotation
This article discussed the philosophy and dynamics of an offender's reentry back into the community and provided discussion on the newly initiated Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction's Ohio Plan.
Abstract
Faced with overburdening caseloads, scarcity of institutional and community-based programming and the demand for more fiscal accountability, corrections management found itself with the need to reinvent. In addition, changes in sentencing had led to an increase number of inmates released with no supervision because they completed their definite term. With this knowledge, it was seen that pre-release preparation or pre-release readiness should begin during the reception and/or diagnostic stage. This would require a change in correctional leadership philosophy. With many corrections concepts steeped in tradition, a change in correctional leadership philosophy would be a challenge. The challenge would be to achieve a more systemic approach ensuring a smooth transition of offender treatment and training from reception through the completion of community supervision. To begin a shift in reentry philosophy toward offender intake, it is necessary that a reentry plan become inculcated into the reception assessment process. In addition, a comprehensive reentry plan must encompass a core set of evidence-based programming that centers on the offender's economic viability on release through education, vocation, or work programs. In reviewing the philosophy of offender reentry, this article discussed the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction's newly instituted "Ohio Plan". In 2001, ODRC launched an initiative entitled "The Ohio Plan for Productive Offender Reentry and Recidivism Reduction" involving the use of an internal planning committee and a larger council of professionals and citizens from the community. The focus involved the examination of several issues important to offender reentry. The plan required that personal reentry plans be developed for each offender being released from institutional supervision. In addition, to get a handle on the number of parole revocations a critical analysis of offenders returned to Ohio's prisons was conducted. These were just the beginning of the ODRC's reentry efforts. Ohio was selected as one of nine States to implement a reentry court program through a partnership between the ODRC and the Richland County Common Pleas Court. The reentry plan requires plenty of continuous improvement processes and dedication. References