Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

TPC in Georgia

In April of 2004, Georgia was accepted as a participant in the National Institute of Corrections’ Transition from Prison to the Community (TPC) Initiative. Since that time, key leaders from numerous agencies have collaborated on what is called the {{Georgia Reentry Impact Project (GRIP)}}. They work together on a variety of teams that are focused on improving offender reentry activities throughout the State.

The vision of these leaders is: “Promoting public safety through collaborative partnerships, which reflect a seamless system, to ensure that all returning offenders are law-abiding, contributing members of their community.”

Team Leadership Structure

Partners in this initiative are leaders from the Office of the Governor; the Council of Superior Court Judges, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council; the Departments of Community Affairs, Corrections, Education, Human Resources, Juvenile Justice, Labor, Technical and Adult Education; the Georgia Bureau of Investigation; the State Board of Pardons and Paroles; and the Workforce Investment Board.

Employees with these partner agencies are working together to study and resolve issues, develop new and innovative strategies, and encourage greater short and long-term success for the 20,000 offenders released annually from Georgia’s prisons.

The work of this initiative is overseen by a Steering Committee that is composed of the agency heads or top authorities for the partner entities. The Steering Committee meets twice a year to consider recommendations, make decisions concerning the direction of the effort, and to assist the Policy Team in overcoming specific obstacles associated with this effort.

The Policy Team is the “engine” that drives all GRIP work activities. The Policy Team meets monthly, and is comprised of Deputy Directors, Division Directors or other appropriate individuals from the various partner agencies. The Policy Team is chaired by the Governor’s Policy Advisor on Public Safety and General Government.

Initially the Policy Team was tasked with studying offender re-entry in the State, and making recommendations for improvement to the Steering Committee. The Policy Team formed work groups that were each tasked with gathering information and considering current and emerging practices in the following areas:

  • Sentencing
  • Assessment and Classification
  • Release Decision Making and Transitional Preparation
  • Community Supervision and Resources
  • Employment and Education
  • Housing
  • Institutional and Community-Based Treatment
  • Data and Mapping

As a result of the work of the Policy Team, three core recommendations and twenty-seven specific recommendations were made to the Steering Committee in October of 2005. The Steering Committee approved all recommendations and tasked the Policy Team with implementing the recommendations. The Policy Team reformed into an Implementation Oversight Team, and established six implementation work groups:

  • Assessment and Intake
  • Institutional Programming
  • Transition Planning and Case Management
  • Release Decision Making
  • Community Supervision and Services; and
  • Evaluation

The Implementation Oversight Team meets monthly to receive reports from work group chairs, to resolve issues, to coordinate activities, and to develop strategies for moving forward with the overall effort.

Early Targets of Change

One specific target of change was identified very early in the project. Some offenders who are eligible for parole have no acceptable residence. As a result, these offenders were remaining in prison beyond their release eligibility dates for months – and in some cases years. Several key employees of the partner agencies worked together to resolve two key aspects of this problem: a constitutional prohibition against faith-based groups receiving State funds and a lack of residential resources. The innovative solutions developed have resulted in the discharge of a significant number of offenders and a significant cost-avoidance to the State. Their effort, the Reentry Partnership Housing Project, resulted in the identification of grant funds, and the linking of funds with certified housing providers. It is estimated that, as a direct result of this group’s work in its first year, the State has thus far realized a cost avoidance benefit of nearly two million dollars.

Other early targets of change included expanding institutional programming in cognitive skills, substance abuse and vocational education; creating career centers within pre-release and transitional housing centers; and assisting offenders close to release with obtaining critical papers (drivers’ licenses, social security, disability, veterans’ benefits, etc.). All of these activities are continuing to receive attention.

Assessment Strategy

While a classification tool had been used within institutional corrections for many years, this tool was not useful for identifying significant criminogenic risks and re-entry needs or the corresponding institutional programming. As a result, the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) implemented the COMPAS instrument, and this tool is now being utilized beginning at intake to direct institutional placement for programming purposes and re-entry planning. This web-based assessment instrument and associated case planning tool will follow the offender from prison intake, inform release decision-making, and facilitate parole and/or probation supervision. It will also be used by community-based service providers. Work in this area is continuing.

Survival Needs

Work on offender housing issues was an early target of change. In addition to the reentry partnership housing project mentioned above, efforts are underway to resolve other housing barriers. Perhaps most notable is developing model guidance for local housing authorities across the State regarding placement of offenders in publicly supported housing units. All local housing authorities participated in the development of model language that should lead to the consistent application of rules and requirements while opening up residential options for offenders who came to prison from housing authority property. Faith-based partners have played a significant role in several of the offender housing efforts that have been developed thus far.

Increased institutional programming in cognitive skills, vocational education, and substance abuse should also assist offenders with their transition. Additionally, prison industry enhancement (“PIE”) programs have been developed to aid offenders in learning job skills and building assets that can be used during and after transition from prison.

Pre-Release Planning

Studies in Georgia indicated that inmates who participated in “transition centers” are 11% less likely than general population releases to return to prison within three years after release. GDC has significantly expanded pre-release centers and transitional centers allowing more offenders participation in pre-release programming. 1,400 additional pre-release beds, and 4 re-missioned in-house transition centers for offenders within a year of completing their sentences, will allow many more inmates to experience important transitional programming prior to release and increase linkages established before release with community-based aftercare services.

One particular pre-release activity that has yielded some interesting partnerships is the “Fatherhood Initiative.” In collaboration with the Department of Human Resources, the Department of Technical and Adult Education, the Department of Labor, and GDC, offenders owing child support learn job skills at certain pre-release centers, and partner agencies secure training, education and employment so that child support payments can be made soon after prison release.

Some pre-release centers are pilot sites for testing a variety of transitional services and programs. These pilot sites will develop new protocols for pre-release planning and services, will allow for numerous partnerships to be utilized and evaluated, and the lessons learned will assist future re-entry planning by the GRIP Policy Team.

Case Planning and Management

It was also determined very early in this effort that a single, dynamic, electronic case plan should be developed and utilized by the criminal justice agency partners, and other entities as appropriate. A single case plan promotes intra and inter-agency collaboration and support of each other’s work.

The intake COMPAS yields an initial case plan. Additional input, as the offender moves through the criminal justice process, will be added to this case plan. Then, a re-entry COMPAS will be completed prior to release to capture other, essential, offender transition information. The re-entry assessment is still in development.

The single case management plan is called a transition accountability plan (“TAP”). Some details of the TAP, including the timing and focus of some re-assessments, are still being developed. Work is underway to automate case plans, and eliminate barriers so that the electronic case plan can be shared with field supervision and social services.

Innovative Partnerships

Local reentry initiatives have been the focus of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) activities in Georgia. SVORI efforts in selected communities resulted in local partners joining teams to study and develop methods of impacting offender reentry with local transition center inmates. Some of these local efforts, particularly in Savannah, have yielded significant results. GDC probation staff serve as local coordinators for this effort.

Linking the Transition from Prison to the Community Initiative and SVORI activities has been a matter of on-going interest, and efforts to coordinate the state and local aspects of these initiatives will continue.

Technical Assistance from NIC

Since Georgia’s participation in the TPC Initiative began, NIC has been providing technical assistance through its Cooperative Agreement Partner—the Center for Effective Public Policy. CEPP provides orientation on the TPC model, information, cross-site communication, periodic workshops for participating sites, and expert consultation from a site coordinator assigned to work with the leadership team.