Lake County Adult Detention Facilities

HISTORY

On August 2, 1993, six inmates were transferred from their respective living quarters in the Lake County Jail to “M-2," a range located in the Work Release area of the jail (Better Known As “The M-Zone). Each of these inmates was incarcerated as a result of an offense related to their consumption of alcohol or other drugs. Their sentencing judges and probation officers felt they were in need of treatment for the addictions that continued to cause them trouble. Four of the six men had treatment for chemical dependency in their pasts, but no longer possessed the resources to access treatment at this point in their lives.

The events of August 2, 1993 represented the culmination of years of effort and collaboration that went into the creation of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office Jail Treatment Program (JTP). It would not have happened without critical contributions from the Lake County Commissioners, the Lake County Courts of Common Pleas and its Adult Probation Department, the Municipal Courts of Lake County and their Probation Departments, the Lake County ADAMHS BOARD, and Lake County Sheriff Daniel A. Dunlap and his staff. In addition, the JTP was enabled to provide services to clients under the auspices of the Lake - Geauga Center on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Inc. until it became a state-licensed program in its own right.

The first year of operation saw 160 clients admitted to the Jail Treatment Program. A hallmark event of that first year was the program’s license by the Ohio Department of Alcoholism and Drug Addiction Services (ODADAS) as a provider of Intensive Out-patient treatment for chemical dependency in May of 1994. In November of 1994, the program admitted its first female client, representing a significant policy shift for the jail, in that male and female inmates were interacting in the same program. This policy shift enabled a huge gap – that is, service provision for incarcerated women – to be closed.

In 1996 the Jail Treatment Program found a new home within the Lake County Adult Detention Facility when the program moved from range 2M2 to range 2B. This move allowed for more space and an environment more conducive to conducting treatment groups and counseling sessions. The “treatment range” 2B houses 24 males. Male participants are segregated from the general jail population. The females who participate in treatment are housed with other general population females, but range 2E has been dedicated to house the women who are participating in the treatment program.

In May of 1997 the Jail Treatment Program solicited funding for an additional counselor. The proposal called for the Lake County Board of ADAMHS to advance sufficient funds to the Jail Treatment Program to hire an additional counselor. The Board would be reimbursed by the Indigent Driver Treatment Fund (IDTF) as indigent offenders were admitted to the program. Painesville , Willoughby , and Mentor Municipal Court judges all submitted letters of commitment and support for the proposal. The cooperation of the Lake County Municipal Courts in this endeavor enabled us to grow as a program and provide treatment for up to 33% more chemically dependent offenders each year.

STAFF PROFILES

For the year 2007 the staff of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office Jail Treatment Program was comprised of five full time counselors.

Lawrence Smith Jr. - Director/Clinical Supervisor of the JTP.
Larry started working for the JTP in July of 1993. A graduate of Cleveland State University ’s school of social work, Larry began working professionally with chemically dependent men in 1988. He came to the JTP from Lake-Geauga CADA’s Lake House Men’s Halfway House where he worked for five years. Prior to that Larry worked for a local mental health agency assisting adults living with mental illnesses. Larry’s credentials include BA, CCDC IIIe.

Sgt. Katherine A. Silvi - Kathy has worked for the Lake County Adult Detention Facility for 18 years. Prior to coming to the Sheriff’s Dept. She worked for Juvenile Court for 7 years as a shift supervisor. She was selected by the administration to be the Program Coordinator for the JTP in 1993. Adding to her skills as a corrections supervisor, Kathy studied and was credentialed as a CCDC I in 1996. Kathy is a Lake Erie College graduate where she earned a BS degree in Business and Sociology. Kathy is currently the Programs Intake Coordinator, a position created last year to address increasing referral/assessment/intake demands.

Constance Ness - Constance joined the staff in February of 2006. She filled a full time chemical dependency counselor position. Constance came to us from Laurelwood Hospital where she worked for several years. Constance has experience in working with chemically dependent male and females clients in a variety of settings including hospital, residential and out-patient settings. Constance’s credentials include Associate of Arts Degree and CCDC I.

Suzanne Teague - Sue joined the counseling staff of the JTP in June of 2000. She filled the counseling position which became available when JTP counselor Larry Smith replaced Jerry Retter as the Clinical Supervisor of the JTP. Sue came to us from Forbes House where she worked for five years as a counselor with victims of domestic/family violence, and children’s groups. She also worked at Western Reserve Counseling for nine years where she was involved in individual and group counseling, anger management and sexual abuse groups. She implemented the women’s Anger Management group at Western Reserve Counseling. She has a Masters of Education in Community Agency Counseling through Cleveland State University . Sue’s credentials include LPC and CCDC I.

Karen Winslow - Karen joined the staff of the JTP on July 9, 2007. She filled a vacant full time chemical dependency counselor position. Karen is a City of Painesville native, but resided in Georgia and South Carolina for about sixteen years before returning to Ohio in 2001. Karen has worked for Turning Point, Lake Geauga Recovery Services and Laurelwood Hospital before joining the JTP team. Karen is currently securing an Associates degree in Human Services. Karen’s credentials include CCDC I.

PROGRAM PROFILE

The Jail Treatment Program was developed in response to the needs of the Criminal Justice System. For Lake county judges and probation officers, it provides structured intensive chemical dependency treatment for clients in a setting where abstinence is insured. It also provides a unique opportunity to mete out logical consequences for crimes while simultaneously addressing the root cause of those crimes. For those offenders who have failed to successfully arrest their addiction through less restrictive means, the Jail Treatment Program provides a logical and cost effective alternative.

Prospective participants of the program are carefully assessed by a State Certified Chemical Dependency Professional in order to ensure their eligibility and appropriateness for admission. These assessments occur during the inmates incarceration and culminate in a staffing where the treatment team decides on a candidates’admission.

It is important to note that participants of the Jail Treatment Program are held accountable to the same rules as the general jail population. Participation in the program will not be “easy time,” nor will clients receive special privileges over and above the opportunity to avail themselves of treatment. The Jail Treatment Program uses the inherent pain of loss of one’s freedom to motivate an individual’s examination of what exactly needs to change in his or her life.

Each client entering the program will do so voluntarily. Clients will be enrolled into the MACSIS data health care plan and will contract an initial treatment plan addressing a goal and objectives applicable to all eligible participants. Additional and more individualized treatment plans will be provided and developed by the clients assigned primary counselor. Individualized treatment plans will be developed within 10 days of the clients admission to treatment. Treatment planning is done in collaboration with the client which identifies problems that present barriers to ongoing recovery along with measurable objectives which assist clients in overcoming problems in order to achieve treatment goals.

All participants attend didactic presentations, in the form of lectures and films on the disease of chemical dependency , recovery and other related topics no less than five (5) days per week. Clients also receive group therapy sessions at least three (3) days per week.

Individualized therapy/counseling sessions are conducted on an as needed basis and as prescribed in individualized treatment plans, but no less than once weekly. Clients are also exposed to members of the twelve step community on a regular basis. Volunteers from AA/NA support groups lead discussions on recovery related topics and share their experiences with the clients.

During the final week of treatment, clients are assisted by the counseling staff to develop clinically sound continuing care plans. Recommendations and the rationale for them are communicated to clients, and the staff assists in arranging a smooth transfer to appropriate programs, activities and level of care. The counselors provide updates and discharge summaries to the referring courts and community agencies.

Hours of Programming: The Lake County Sheriff’s Office Jail Treatment Programs hours of operation are Monday through Friday 7:30am - 3:30pm.

Ø                  Group Counseling Sessions on Mon., Wed. and Fri. = approx. 6 hours per week (each client)Ø                  Individual Counseling Sessions scheduled for various times throughout the week = approx. 1 hour per
             week (per client)
Ø                  Lectures Daily Mon.- Fri. = approx. 5 hours per week (each client)
Ø                  Films Monday’s and Friday’s = approx. 2 - 4 hours per week (each client)

Average Duration of Consumers Involvement in a Service: The average duration of client involvement in the Jail Treatment Program is (28-30) days.

Outcome Goals of Program: The outcome goals of the Jail Treatment Program are: (1) To reduce recidivism related to chemical dependency and related behaviors by 65% in the Lake County Adult Detention Facility. (2) To provide quality chemical dependency treatment to inmates incarcerated in the Lake County Adult Detention Facility. At an economical cost to clients, the criminal justice system, and the community. (3) To link clients to services and programs that will increase their chances of recovery and help them maintain the ongoing process of recovery through effective continuing care planning, including twelve step programs involvement, outpatient and/or residential treatment, mental health services, anger management and other community based rehabilitation programs. (4) To educate clients about their disease of chemical dependency and what recovery entails in order to increase hope and motivation for abstinence and long-term recovery.

Review of the Year 2007

CLIENT PARTICIPANT PROFILE
(Based on 343 total participants)

ADMISSIONS
BY AGE GROUP:
18-24 (116) 25-34 (91) 35-44 (79) 45-54 (48) 55-64 (8) Over 65 (1)

BY RACE:                                     BY GENDER:
CAUCASSIONS =285                  MALES      =256
BLACKS      = 49                          FEMALES = 87
BI-RACIALS =    3                                              343
HISPANICS =    4
ASIANS       =    2
                        343

BY LEVEL OF OFFENSE:
Felony 144 (42%) Juvenile 7 (2%) Misdemeanor 192 (56%)

BY COURT
Common Pleas Court (144)
Juvenile Court (7)
MENTOR (30)
PAINESVILLE (72)
WILLOUGHBY (90)

INSTANT DUI OFFENSES:
(PARTICIPANTS ADMITTED IN 2007 DUE TO DUI/OVI OFFENSES )
COMMON PLEAS (7) MENTOR (14) PAINESVILLE (15) WILLOUGHBY (30)
Total = 66

NUMBER OF 2007 PARTICIPANTS WITH: YES NO

PRIOR DUI/OVI OFFENSE                          170 173
PRIOR PRISON INCARCERATION           48 295
PRIOR TREATMENT EPISODE                 220 123
PRIOR MENTAL HEALTH DIAGNOSIS    128 215

2007 MENTAL HEALTH DIAGNOSIS ( by Type )
ADD 4 Paranoid Schizophrenic 1
ADHD 9 Post Partum Depression 1
Anxiety 8 PTSD 10
Bipolar 33 Schizophrenia 2
Depression 59 Unspecified 0
OCD 1
( 35 of these 128 had multiple diagnoses such as Depression, Bipolar and PTSD.)
Borderline, Intermittent Explosive Disorder, Panic Attacks were some of the coupled diagnosis’.
Total = 128

2007 PARTICIPANTS PRIMARY DRUG OF CHOICE (DOC) [In order of frequency]
Alcohol = 141 Methamphetamine =    4
Marijuana =   83 Ecstasy =    3
Cocaine (Crack) =   50 Ultram =    1
Cocaine (Powder) =   16 Xanax =    0
Heroin =   26 Water/Wet/PCP =    0
Opioid Pills =   19   (including Vicoden, Percocet, Oxycotin etc.)

REFERRALS - TOTAL FOR 2007 = 370
BY COURT
COMMON PLEAS    = 159
JUVENILE                  =     8
WILLOUGHBY          =   93
PAINESVILLE           =   78
MENTOR                   =   32

ADMISSIONS - TOTAL FOR 2007 = 343
BY COURT
COMMON PLEAS = 144
JUVENILE =    7
WILLOUGHBY =   90
PAINESVILLE =   72
MENTOR =   30

DISCHARGES - TOTAL FOR 2007 = 336
REGULAR (SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION) = 317
DISCIPLINARY =   17
MEDICAL =    0
ADMINISTRATIVE =    2
MENTAL HEALTH =    0
RETURNED TO PRISON =    0

AVG. DAILY CENSUS for 2007 = 31.20
(The month of March 2007 yielded the highest daily average for the year with a census of 35.29, the month of November 2007 yielded the lowest daily average for the year with a census of 26.4)

Recidivism FY-2006
(July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006)

	Didn’t Return to Jail (194)	Returned to Jail (148)	Total (342)
By COURTS	(%) Individual Courts	(%) Individual Courts	(%) of Total Clts. per Court
Common Pleas	75 (56.4%)	58 (43.6%)	133 (38.9%)
Juvenile	7 (88.0%)	1 (12.0%)	8 (2.3%)
Willoughby	52 (63.5%)	30 (36.5%) ↑	82 (24.0%)
Painesville	35 (46.6%)	40 (53.4%)	75 (21.9%)
Mentor	25 (56.9%)	19 (43.1%) ↓	44 (12.9%)

	Didn’t Return	Returned	Total
By CATEGORIES	(%) Individual Categories	(%) Individual Categories	(%) of Total Clts. per Category
Prior Prison Exposure	38 or (55.1%)	31 or (44.9%) ↑	69 (20.1%)
Dual Dx.	72 or (54.2%)	61 or (45.8%)	133 (39.9%)
NEOCAP	32 or (57.2%)	24 or (42.8%)	56 (16.4%)
DUI Offenders	36 or (69.4%)	16 or (39.6%) ↓	52 (15.2%)

	Didn’t Return	Returned	Total
By AGE	(%) individual Age groups	(%) individual Age groups	(%) of total Clts. Per Age group
Age 18 - 24	61 (56.1%)	48 (43.9%)	109 (31.9%)
Age 25 - 34	58 (58.0%)	42 (42.0%) ↑	100 (29.3%)
Age 35 - 44	45 (52.9%)	40 (47.1%)	85 (24.9%)
Age 45 - 54	23 (58.9%)	16 (41.1%) ↓	39 (11.5%)
Age 55 - 70	6 (75.0%)	2 (25.0%)	8 (2.4%)

*Based on clients not returning to the Lake County Adult Detention Facility within a Year after Completing the Jail Treatment Program.

Of the three-hundred, forty-two (342) participants completing treatment during the period between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2006, one-hundred, forty-eight (148) or (43.3%) returned to jail within one year of completing the Lake County Sheriff’s Office Jail Treatment Program. One-hundred, ninety-four (194) did not return within a year of completion. This means that recidivism was reduced by (56.7%) for FY 2006

By COURTS

Painesville Municipal Court participants had the highest percentage rate of recidivism with (40 or 53.34%) of their 75 participants returning to jail within a year. Painesville Municipal Court accounted for 21.9% of the total client population for this statistical period. Willoughby Municipal Court participants had the lowest percentage rate of recidivism *for courts with over 10 participants for the period (30 or 36.5%) of their 82 participants returning to jail within a year. Willoughby Municipal Court accounted for 24.0% of the total client population for this statistical period.

*Lake County Juvenile Court returned only 1 of their 8 participants for the period which calculated to only 12.0% returning to jail. Juvenile Court accounted for 2.3% of the total client population for the period.

By SPECIAL CATEGORIES

Participants with dual diagnosis or co-existing disorders had the highest percentage rate of recidivism in the special categories identified this year. There were 133 participants with co-existing disorders, 61 or (45.8%) of those participants returned to jail within a year of completing our program. Participants with prior prison exposure had the highest percentage rate of recidivism in the special categories identified last year.

Again OVI offenders reflected the lowest percentage rate of recidivism of the identified categories with (16 or 30.6%) of the 52 OVI participants returning to jail within a year of completion. The 52 OVI offenders accounted for (15.2%) of the total client population for the statistical period. Participants who attended NEOCAP after participating in the JTP consisted of 56 participants accounting for 16.4% of the total program population. 32 or (57.2%) of the 56 participants did not return to jail within a year.

By AGE

The age group with the highest percentage rate of recidivism was the group ranging from ages 35 - 44. There were a total of 85 participants in this age group, forty or (47.1%) of these participants returned to jail within a year of completing the program. This age group had the third highest overall percent of program participants for the period (85 or 24.9%). The age group with the lowest percentage of recidivism for the period was the group ranging from ages 55-70. There were a total of 8 participants in this age group, two or (25.0%) of these participants returned to jail within a year of completing the program. This age group had the lowest overall percent of program participants for the period (8 or 2.4%). Last year the 25-34 age group netted the highest recidivism rate. Two years ago the 18-24 age group netted the highest recidivism rate.

By GENDER

These statistics include 267 males, of which 147 or (55.06%) did not return to jail, and 75 female participants, of which 46 or (61.4%) did not return.

By ETHNICITY

Of the 220 Caucasian male participants------------120 or (54.6%) did not return.
Of the 38 Afro-American male participants-------- 25 or (66.0%) did not return.
Of the 6 Hispanic male participants------------------- 2 or (33.4%) did not return.
Of the 2 Bi-racial male participants------------------- 0 or (00.0%) did not return, or all returned.
Of the 1 Asian male participant------------------------ 0 or (00.0%) did not return, or all returned.
Of the 65 Caucasian female participants------------44 or (67.8%) did not return.
Of the 8 Afro-American female participants---------3 or (37.5%) did not return.
Of the 2 Bi-racial female participant------------------0 or (0%) did not return or all returned...
There were no Hispanic female participants---------N/A
There were no Asian female participants-------------N/A

These evaluations are based on a scoring scale from 1-5 with 1 being not helpful and 5 being very helpful.

Fiscal Year 2007

FY 2007 Quarters	Lectures	Group	Individual Counseling	TX Assign.	AA/NA Meetings	Film Series	No. of Surveys
1^st Jul. 06	3.60	4.13	4.00	3.60	3.14	2.06	15
Aug. 06	3.69	4.38	4.23	4.07	3.92	3.30	13
Sep. 06	4.05	4.23	4.11	4.05	3.58	2.70	17
1 Qtr. Avg.	3.78	4.24	4.11	3.90	3.54	2.68	Tot. 45 (Avg. 15)
2^nd Oct. 06	4.11	4.11	4.70	4.29	3.88	2.29	17
Nov. 06	4.23	4.76	4.61	4.66	4.08	3.75	13
Dec. 06	3.56	4.18	3.87	4.25	4.06	3.18	16
2 Qtr. Avg.	3.96	4.35	4.39	4.40	4.00	3.07	Tot. 46 (Avg. 15.3)
3^rd Jan. 07	4.00	4.27	4.63	4.45	3.90	4.00	11
Feb. 07	3.75	4.37	4.87	4.25	4.25	3.87	8
Mar. 07	4.00	4.47	4.57	4.63	3.94	3.42	19
3 Qtr. Avg.	3.91	4.37	4.69	4.44	4.03	3.76	Tot. 38 (Avg. 12.6)
4^th Apr. 07	3.85	4.35	4.10	4.10	3.70	3.10	20
May 07	3.92	4.15	4.30	4.15	4.23	3.61	13
Jun. 07	4.26	4.73	4.60	4.40	3.66	3.33	15
4 Qtr. Avg.	4.01	4.41	4.33	4.21	3.86	3.34	Tot. 48 (Avg. 16 )

Yearly Avg. FY 2007	3.91	4.34	4.38	4.23	3.85	3.21	Total for FY-07 177 (Avg. 14.72 per month)
Activities	Lectures	Group	Individual Counseling	Tx. Assign.	AA/NA Meetings	Film Series	No. of Surveys

CONTINUING CARE/AFTERCARE REFERRALS
(based on 336 discharges in 2007)

Outpatient (179) Mental Health/Dual Diagnosis (19)
[Group 175, Individual Counseling 4] [Group 16, Individual Counseling 3]

Residential CD (40) Residential Dual Diagnosis (3)
Case Management (1) Anger Management (3)
Community Based Correctional Facility (63) Drug or Mental Health Courts (1)
Minimum Security Facility (1) Minimum Security Facility Outside (28)
AA/NA Meetings Only (4) No Recommendation/Unknown (2)

Some participants were referred to more than one placement or level of care.

FUNDING SOURCES    SFY-2007
Lake County Commissioners = $ 176,770.00
Lake County ADAMHS Board = $   82,638.00
Purchase of Service (Municipal IDTF) = $   85,850.00
Total = $ 345,528.00

AGENCIES AND SERVICES USED FOR CONTINUING CARE/AFTERCARE TREATMENT IN 2007

Thanks to all agencies and your staffs for being here for us and our client continuing care needs. Success and growth in the new year as you accomplish your goals and work toward your mission.

AA/NA
Associated Bilingual Counselors
Catholic Charities
Community Action for Addiction
Community Drug Board (Akron)
Cuyahoga County Drug Court
Cuyahoga County TASC
Diane Witzig
Ed Keating Center
Firelands Counseling
Free Clinic (Cleveland)
FMRH Mental Health Council
Glenbeigh
Horizon House
Horizon Village (NY)
Lake Geauga CADA
*Mentor Office
*Chardon Office
*Lake HouseLake Area Recovery Center (LARC)
Laura’s Home
Laurelwood Hospitals
Matt Talbot
Moore Counseling Center
Minimum Security Facility
Outpatient Aftercare
Inpatient Aftercare
Neighboring
NEOCAP
North Coast Counseling (NCC) *Willoughby Office *Ashtabula Office
North Coast Behavioral
Pathways
PrisonRecovery Resources
Salvation Army (Cleveland/Akron)
Turning Point
Veteran Administration
Western Reserve Counseling

Short Term Goals:
Focus on Quality Improvement issues including; increasing staff in the form of attaining at least a part-time support staff personnel; examining and employing techniques described in Quality of Culture (QOC) literature, to include better utilization of outcome measures in an effort to improve client outcomes and staff productivity; exploring group and individual counseling techniques and strategies for our specialized client population (chemically dependent criminal offenders). Promote focused staff training specific to criminal offenders and co-occurring disorders.

Long Term Goals:
Over the past few years we have been fraught with the abundance of referrals for treatment, the limited size of our staff, and our desire to accommodate every court and client who is referred. Most often our referral sources understand when we are full or have a “waiting list”, however we need to seriously look at obtaining another staff/support staff personnel in order to keep up with the pace and have an opportunity to further develop the program for greater success and the changing times.