welcome
DESCRIPTION
WELCOME. OKLAHOMA IMPAIRED DRIVING Prevention SUMMIT REDUCING RECIDIVISM February 28 th 2012. IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES. What Works What Doesn’t. CONTACT. Ray Caesar LPC, LADC Director of Addiction Specialty Programs Oklahoma Department of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Services - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
WELCOMEOKLAHOMA
IMPAIRED DRIVINGPrevention SUMMIT
REDUCING RECIDIVISMFebruary 28th 2012
IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES
What WorksWhat Doesn’t
CONTACT• Ray Caesar LPC, LADC• Director of Addiction Specialty Programs• Oklahoma Department of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Services• P.O. Box 53277• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73152-3277• [email protected]• Office 405-522-3870• Fax 405-522-4470
CURRENT INTERVENTIONS
COST
COST
Costs for DUI and related offenses are intended to:
~ Pay for the services provided,
~ Discourage the behavior of driving while intoxicated.
COST
The cost for DUI or a related offense in Oklahoma and nationally is estimated to be
$10,000.00.
COST
BAIL$150.00 to $2,500.00
COST
TOWING$60.00 to $1,200.00
COST
IMPOUND$100.00 to $1,200.00
COST
INSURANCEAutomotive insurance coverage will increase for 3 to 5 years.
These cost increases will be double to quadruple basic costs.
COST
MODIFIED LICENSE FEE
$175.00
COST
LEGAL FEES$2,500.00 TO
$25,000.00
COST
FINES & COURT COSTS
$300.00 TO $1,200.00
COST
ADSAC ASSESSMENT
$160.00 TO $175.00
COST
ADSAC COURSE$150.00 TO $360.00
COST
VICTIMS IMPACT PANEL$50.00
COST
CLINICAL INTERVENTIONS
$0.00 TO $13,000.00
COST
MONITORINGLEG BRACELET
$300.00 PER MONTH
COST
MONITORINGINTERLOCK
$115.00 TO $160.00 INSTALLATION$65.00 PER MONTH$35.00 REMOVAL
COST
REINSTATEMENT FEE
$85.00 TO $250.00
COST
ADDITIONAL COSTSTIME OFF WORK
JOB RESTRICTIONSLOSS OF EMPLOYMENT
COST
TOTAL$10,000.00
PROBLEM
AVERAGE OKLAHOMA INCOMEMEDIAN INCOME $42,979.00
< POVERTY 16.2% $14,570.00 (Two person household)
2010 US Census
TRENDS
TRENDS
REFUSAL TO TEST
FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY100%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
DUI Convictions by Offense Type: FY96 - FY10
% of Convictions for Offense Type 3 (drug related)% of Convictions for Offense Type 4 (alcohol related)% of Convictions for Offense Type 1 (refusal to test for alcohol)
TRENDS
In the last five years license revocations for Refusal to test have continued to increase while other revocation categories have decreased.
FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY100%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
DUI Convictions by Offense Type: FY96 - FY10
% of Convictions for Offense Type 3 (drug related)% of Convictions for Offense Type 4 (alcohol related)% of Convictions for Offense Type 1 (refusal to test for alcohol)
TRENDS
GENDER
FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY100%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
17% 18% 17% 16% 17% 17% 17% 18% 18% 18% 19% 19% 20% 20% 21%
83% 82% 83% 84% 83% 83% 83% 82% 82% 82% 81% 81% 80% 80% 79%
DUI Convictions by Gender: FY96 - FY10
Female Percentage Male Percentage
TRENDS
Between 1996 and 2010 DUI and related convictions for males fell by 4%.
Between 1996 and 2010 DUI and related convictions for females rose by 4%.
TRENDS
The rates for DUI & related offense by gender indicates the numbers of male offenders are reducing, while the numbers of female offenders continue to increase.
This pattern is most pronounced in rural areas.
Female Male0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
10.3%
13.7%
6.0%6.5%
7.2%7.6%
5.5% 5.6%
Reconviction of DUI Offenders by Gender (after 2 years)
WithOUT Assessments With Assessments With Assessments, Incomplete With Assessments, Complete
TRENDS
• AT TWO YEARS
• Without ADSAC as an intervention, females are less likely to recidivate than males
• With ADSAC as an intervention, female and male recidivism rates are almost identical
TRENDS
FEMALE DUI OFFENDERS• As DUI arrest rates have continued to reduce for approximately twenty years the proportion of female DUI offenders has increased dramatically.• Overall DUI arrest rates have not declined in rural areas.• Female DUI offenders in rural areas present one of the greatest challenges to the system.
The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 2009, Vol. 35, No. 1, Pages 24-27
TRENDS
MALE & FEMALE
OFFENDERS
TRENDS
THE MALE DUI OFFENDERPROFILEUnmarried, undereducated, underemployedAge late twenties to early thirtiesPoor anger management & stress coping skills
Initial attention of law enforcement due to aggressive not erratic driving
TRENDS
THE FEMALE DUI OFFENDERPROFILE
Unmarried, separated or divorcedAge twenty to fiftyUnemployed but seeking employmentArrested secondary to a vehicular crash
Evaluating, Treating and Monitoring the Female DUI Offender William White & Maya Hennessey, Illinois Department of Transportation
TRENDS
MALE TO FEMALE DUI OFFENDER
15.7% of females aged 18 to 25 met criteria for alcohol abuse or alcohol dependency.
26.3% of males aged 18 to 25 met criteria for alcohol abuse or alcohol dependency.
Evaluating, Treating and Monitoring the Female DUI Offender William White & Maya Hennessey, Illinois Department of Transportation
TRENDS
MALE TO FEMALE DUI OFFENDER
At the highest rates of consumption males and females report driving while impaired at the same rates.
DUI arrests are the single greatest category of alcohol related crimes for women.
Evaluating, Treating and Monitoring the Female DUI Offender William White & Maya Hennessey, Illinois Department of Transportation
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Who gets a DUI?
WHO GETS A DUI
1% of all licensed drivers are arrested for DUI & related offenses each year, more than any other crime.
NHTSA
WHO GETS A DUI
25% to 40% of 30% of the population the population consume 90% of never drink the alcohol
========================================
* * * *
========================================
Of this group only 30% or(10% of the total
population) are physically dependent
WHO GETS A DUIAccess to ADSAC services may be required for almost anyone living in Oklahoma
* Only a very small percentage of the population will not be possible candidates for ADSAC services.
*
WHAT WORKS
EFFECTIVNESS OF THE
CURRENT SYSTEM
WHAT WORKS
ANNUAL CONVICTIONSFY 1996 – FY
2010
WHAT WORKS
After a predictable increase in arrests between 2003 and 2005 the rate stabilized.
In 2009 the rate began to fall dramatically.
WHAT WORKS
EVIDENCE BASEDBEST PRACTICES
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
From the assessment process we could:
~ Identify static and dynamic risk factors related to alcohol and other drug use
~ Identify Pathological Using Patterns
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
From the assessment process we could:
~ Assess truthfulness
~ Assess comprehension ability
~ Identify mental health issues
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
From the assessment process we could:
~ Clearly and accurately identify recidivism risk
~ Double check the results
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
TODAY WE CAN!
WHAT WORKS
Drivers Risk Inventory-revisedDRI II
Defendant QuestionnaireDQ
WHAT WORKSThe DRI II consistently places high in studies of DUI assessment instruments.
When cost, ability to screen for drugs as well as alcohol, truthfulness scales, and research to determine reliability and validity are considered, then the DRI II places highest.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Review of Screening Instruments and Procedures for Evaluating DUI Offenders AAA Foundation for Public Safety 2002
The Illinois DUI Assessment Instrument Project & National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
WHAT WORKS
What Works
ASSESSMENT DRIVENFIFTY STATES AND WASHINGTON DC
(2010)
30 Assessment driven process 66%
7 Modified assessment driven process15.5%
6 Offense driven 13.3%
2 No statewide regulation 4.5%
6 Unknown NA
WHAT WORKS
Institute of Medicine
Intervention Spectrum
WHAT WORKS
WHAT WORKS
PREVENTION
I - UNIVERSAL
II - SELECTIVE
III - INDICATED
WHAT WORKS
INDICATEDTargeted to high risk individuals identified as
having minimal but detectable signs and/or symptoms of the high risk behavior.
This intervention is for those known to have involvement (DUI)
WHAT WORKS
TREATMENT
IV - IDENTIFICATION
V – STANDARD TREATMENT
WHAT WORKS
What Works
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
We could accurately identify offender need
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
We could refer offenders to the most appropriate interventions
WOULDN’T IT BE NICE IF…
We could separate offenders by level of severity
TODAY WE CAN
TODAY WE CAN!
TODAY WE CAN
SIX INTERVENTION CATEGORIES
INTERVENTION CATEGORY I Education OnlyII Education Only IIIOutpatientIV Intensive Outpatient VResidential Treatment
TODAY WE CAN
SIX INTERVENTION CATEGORIES
INTERVENTION CATEGORY I Education OnlyII Education Only IIIOutpatientIV Intensive Outpatient VResidential Treatment
TODAY WE CAN
In a random 100 offenders
40% Minimal risk to recidivate30% Moderate risk to recidivate
20% Problem risk to recidivate10% Severe risk to recidivate
PROBLEM
What Doesn’t Work
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
OFFENSE DRIVEN SYSTEMS
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
ONE SIZE FITS ALLINTERVENTIONS
I
ENTIO
PROBLEM
The average number of times an offender drives while legally intoxicated for each DUI & related arrest is 1 in 200.
In some communities this is as high as 1 in 2000.
NHTSA
PROBLEM
Water boils at 212 degrees Fahrenheit
Gasoline freezes at -238 degrees Fahrenheit
PROBLEM
• Nationally, about 1/3 of all DWI & related offenders are repeat offenders• Average 32%
• Low 21% in Iowa
• High 47% in New Mexico
NHTSA
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
PUNISHMENT
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
A 10% INCREASE IN INCARCERATION YIELDS
A 2% TO 4% DECREASE IN RECIDIVISM
What Work Effective Recidivism Reduction and Risk-Focused Prevention Programs February 2008
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
TOO MANY INTERVENTIONSor
IF ONE IS GOODTHEN TEN MUST BE GREAT
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
DISJOINTEDOR
UNCONNECTED INTERVENTIONS
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
TOO MUCH TIME BETWEEN OFFENSE AND
INTERVENTION
WHAT DOESN’T WORK
PSUEDO SCIENCEor
COMMON SENSE DOES NOT ALWAYS MAKE SENSE BUT
IT IS ALWAYS COMMON
PROBLEMS WITH EXIT SURVEYS
Repeat offenders allow approximately six years between offenses.
American Journal of Forensic Psychology
PROBLEMS WITH EXIT SURVEYS
Driving history prior to the first offense was predictive of future recidivism.
American Journal of Forensic Psychology
WHAT WORKS
ADSAC
ADSAC
RECONVICTION RATES AT
TWO YEARS2008 to 2010
WithOUT Assessments With Assessments With Assessments, Incomplete
With Assessments, Complete
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0% 13.1%
6.4%
7.5%
5.6%
Reconviction of DUI Offenders (after 2 years)
ADSAC
AT TWO YEARS• 13.1% recidivism for those not initiating the
ADSAC process
• 5.6% recidivism for those completing the ADSAC process
ADSAC
Reconviction rates after 24 monthsReconviction Rates Without Assessments 13.1%With Assessments Initiated 6.4% With Assessments Incomplete 7.5% With Assessments Complete 5.6%
• The DUI reconviction percentage among offenders w/o assessments was 134% more than among those with completed assessments.
ADSAC
AT TWO YEARS
5.6% recidivism for those
completing the ADSAC process
ADSACVIRGINIA
1 year study of DUI offenders on probation and assigned to VASAP program.
9% recidivism during probation5% recidivism after probation15% total5.6% recidivism for those completing the ADSAC process
at 2 years
Recidivism Rate Comparison Study Rappahannock Area Alcohol Safety Action Program
ADSACMISSOURI
At two years post intervention there was a 16% recidivism rate
5.6% recidivism for those completing the ADSAC process at 2 years
Missouri Department of Mental Health 1999
ADSACTENNESSEE
Recidivism at one year 8.7%Recidivism at two years 10.4%Recidivism at three years 18.3%Recidivism at six years 52.3%Recidivism at ten years 61.5%
5.6% recidivism for those completing the ADSAC process at 2 years
Little, Baker, McCarthy, Davison & Urbaniak, An MRT Based Cognitive Behavioral Treatment for fiirst-time DUI Offenders: Two and Three year Cohort of Davidson County, Tennessee Offenders With a Comparison to the Prime For Life Program March 2010
ADSAC
RECONVICTION RATES BY
OFFENSE TYPE2008 to 2010
Drug Related Alcohol Related0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
9.0%
10.0%9.2%
5.5%
8.2%
3.3%
8.8%
3.2%3.8%
2.5%
Reconviction of DUI Offenders by Offense Type (after 2 years)
WithOUT Assessments With AssessmentsWith Assessments, Incomplete With Assessments, Complete
ADSAC
AT TWO YEARSThe recidivism rate for drug offenders is 60%
greater than that of alcohol offenders.
ADSAC
RECONVICTIONS for ADSAC COMPLETIONS
AFTER TWO YEARS
DRUG OFFENDERS3.8% an almost 60% reduction
ALCOHOL OFFENDERS2.5% an almost 50% reduction
ADSAC
RECONVICTION RATES BY
AGE OF OFFENDER2008 to 2010
16 through 20 21 through 25 26 through 54 55 through 640.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
9.5%
15.4%
13.2%
10.8%
3.8%
9.8%
7.9%
5.6%
3.9%
6.7%5.8%
3.6%
Reconviction of DUI Offenders by Age (after 2 years)
WithOUT Assessments With Assessments, Incomplete With Assessments, Complete
ADSAC
AT TWO YEARSThe recidivism rate for the 21 to 25 year old
age group is the highest, followed closely by the 26 to 54 year old age group.
The lowest rate of recidivism is found in the 16 to 20 year old age group.
FOOD FOR THOUGHTCALIFORNIA
Each year of age decreased recidivism risk by 2.1%
Full time employment decreased recidivism risk by 37.6%
1995 California State Report
FOOD FOR THOUGHTCALIFORNIA
Each prior conviction increased recidivism risk by 26.9%
Each 0.01% increase in BAC increased recidivism risk by 5.4%
Being male increased recidivism risk by 57.5%
1995 California State Report
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Excessive drinking rather than alcoholism creates the majority of alcohol related problems.
The prevalence of alcohol dependence among excessive drinkers in New Mexico, Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, Jan. 2007
FOOD FOR THOUGHTCALIFORNIA
Completion of Tx decreased recidivism risk but, multiple Tx completions increased recidivism risk
1995 California State Report
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Alcohol related fatalities were eight times more likely to have had a DUI/DWI conviction in the five years prior to the crash
New England Journal of Medicine 1994
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Repeat offenders are overrepresented in fatal crashes.
Drivers with prior convictions are 4.1 times more likely to be involved in a fatal traffic accident.
The risk of involvement in a fatal automobile accident increases with the number of prior DWI & related arrests.
NHTSA
THE FUTURE
WHERE TO GOFROM HERE
THE FUTURE
COOPERATION
THE FUTURE
COORDINATION
THE FUTURE
MAKING THE DIFFICULT DECISIONS
THE FUTURE
DEVELOPING A PLAN
THE FUTURE
ENSURINGFOLLOW
THROUGH
CONTACT• Ray Caesar LPC, LADC• Director of Addiction Specialty Programs• Oklahoma Department of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Services• P.O. Box 53277• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73152-3277• [email protected]• Office 405-522-3870• Fax 405-522-4470