730 ILCS 190/ Illinois Crime Reduction Act of 2009.

(730 ILCS 190/1)

Sec. 1. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Illinois Crime Reduction Act of 2009.

(Source: P.A. 96-761, eff. 1-1-10.)

(730 ILCS 190/5)

Sec. 5. Purpose and definitions.

(a) Purpose. The General Assembly hereby declares that it is the policy of Illinois to preserve public safety, reduce crime, and make the most effective use of correctional resources. Currently, the Illinois correctional system overwhelmingly incarcerates people whose time in prison does not result in improved behavior and who return to Illinois communities in less than one year. It is therefore the purpose of this Act to create an infrastructure to provide effective resources and services to incarcerated individuals and individuals supervised in the locality; to hold offenders accountable; to successfully rehabilitate offenders to prevent future involvement with the criminal justice system; to measure the overall effectiveness of the criminal justice system in achieving this policy; and to create the Adult Redeploy Illinois program.

(b) Definitions. As used in this Act, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:

(1) "Assets" are an offender's qualities or resources, such as family and other positive support systems, educational achievement, and employment history, that research has demonstrated will decrease the likelihood that the offender will re-offend and increase the likelihood that the offender will successfully reintegrate into the locality.

(2) "Case plan" means a consistently updated written proposal that shall follow the offender through all phases of the criminal justice system, that is based on the offender's risks, assets, and needs as identified through the assessment tool described in this Act, and that outlines steps the offender shall take and the programs in which the offender shall participate to maximize the offender's ability to be rehabilitated.

(3) "Conditions of supervision" include conditions described in Section 5-6-3.1 of the Unified Code of Corrections.

(4) "Evidence-based practices" means policies, procedures, programs, and practices that have been demonstrated to reduce recidivism among incarcerated individuals and individuals on local supervision.

(5) "Local supervision" includes supervision in local-based, non-incarceration settings under such conditions and reporting requirements as are imposed by the court or the Prisoner Review Board.

(6) "Needs" include an offender's criminogenic qualities, skills, and experiences that can be altered in ways that research has demonstrated will minimize the offender's chances of re-offending and maximize the offender's chances of successfully reintegrating into the locality.

(6.5) "Offender" means a person charged with or convicted of a probation-eligible offense.

(7) "Risks" include the attributes of an offender that are commonly considered to be those variables, such as age, prior criminal history, history of joblessness, and lack of education that research has demonstrated contribute to an offender's likelihood of re-offending and impact an offender's ability to successfully reintegrate into the locality.

(8) (Blank).

(Source: P.A. 100-999, eff. 1-1-19.)

(730 ILCS 190/10)

Sec. 10. Evidence-based programming.

(a) Purpose. Research and practice have identified new strategies and policies that can result in a significant reduction in recidivism rates and the successful local reintegration of offenders. The purpose of this Section is to ensure that State and local agencies direct their resources to services and programming that have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing recidivism and reintegrating offenders into the locality.

(b) Evidence-based programming in local supervision.

(1) The Parole Division of the Department of Corrections and the Prisoner Review Board shall adopt policies, rules, and regulations that, within the first year of the adoption, validation, and utilization of the statewide, standardized risk assessment tool described in this Act, result in at least 25% of supervised individuals being supervised in accordance with evidence-based practices; within 3 years of the adoption, validation, and utilization of the statewide, standardized risk assessment tool result in at least 50% of supervised individuals being supervised in accordance with evidence-based practices; and within 5 years of the adoption, validation, and utilization of the statewide, standardized risk assessment tool result in at least 75% of supervised individuals being supervised in accordance with evidence-based practices. The policies, rules, and regulations shall:

(A) Provide for a standardized individual case plan that follows the offender through the criminal justice system (including in-prison if the supervised individual is in prison) that is:

(i) Based on the assets of the individual as well as his or her risks and needs identified through the assessment tool as described in this Act.

(ii) Comprised of treatment and supervision services appropriate to achieve the purpose of this Act.

(iii) Consistently updated, based on program participation by the supervised individual and other behavior modification exhibited by the supervised individual.

(B) Concentrate resources and services on high-risk offenders.

(C) Provide for the use of evidence-based programming related to education, job training, cognitive behavioral therapy, and other programming designed to reduce criminal behavior.

(D) Establish a system of graduated responses.

(i) The system shall set forth a menu of presumptive responses for the most common types of supervision violations.

(ii) The system shall be guided by the model list of intermediate sanctions created by the Probation Services Division of the State of Illinois pursuant to subsection (1) of Section 15 of the Probation and Probation Officers Act and the system of intermediate sanctions created by the Chief Judge of each circuit court pursuant to Section 5-6-1 of the Unified Code of Corrections.

(iii) The system of responses shall take into account factors such as the severity of the current violation; the supervised individual's risk level as determined by a validated assessment tool described in this Act; the supervised individual's assets; his or her previous criminal record; and the number and severity of any previous supervision violations.

(iv) The system shall also define positive reinforcements that supervised individuals may receive for compliance with conditions of supervision.

(v) Response to violations should be swift and certain and should be imposed as soon as practicable but no longer than 3 working days of detection of the violation behavior.

(vi) The system of graduated responses shall be published on the Department of Corrections website for public view.

(2) Conditions of local supervision (probation and mandatory supervised release). Conditions of local supervision whether imposed by a sentencing judge or the Prisoner Review Board shall be imposed in accordance with the offender's risks, assets, and needs as identified through the assessment tool described in this Act.

(3) The Department of Corrections and the Prisoner Review Board shall annually publish an exemplar copy of any evidence-based assessments, questionnaires, or other instruments used to set conditions of release.

(c) Evidence-based in-prison programming.

(1) The Department of Corrections shall adopt policies, rules, and regulations that, within the first year of the adoption, validation, and utilization of the statewide, standardized risk assessment tool described in this Act, result in at least 25% of incarcerated individuals receiving services and programming in accordance with evidence-based practices; within 3 years of the adoption, validation, and utilization of the statewide, standardized risk assessment tool result in at least 50% of incarcerated individuals receiving services and programming in accordance with evidence-based practices; and within 5 years of the adoption, validation, and utilization of the statewide, standardized risk assessment tool result in at least 75% of incarcerated individuals receiving services and programming in accordance with evidence-based practices. The policies, rules, and regulations shall:

(A) Provide for the use and development of a case plan based on the risks, assets, and needs identified through the assessment tool as described in this Act. The case plan should be used to determine in-prison programming; should be continuously updated based on program participation by the prisoner and other behavior modification exhibited by the prisoner; and should be used when creating the case plan described in subsection (b).

(B) Provide for the use of evidence-based programming related to education, job training, cognitive behavioral therapy and other evidence-based programming.

(C) Establish education programs based on a teacher to student ratio of no more than 1:30.

(D) Expand the use of drug prisons, modeled after the Sheridan Correctional Center, to provide sufficient drug treatment and other support services to non-violent inmates with a history of substance abuse.

(2) Participation and completion of programming by prisoners can impact earned time credit as determined under Section 3-6-3 of the Unified Code of Corrections.

(3) The Department of Corrections shall provide its employees with intensive and ongoing training and professional development services to support the implementation of evidence-based practices. The training and professional development services shall include assessment techniques, case planning, cognitive behavioral training, risk reduction and intervention strategies, effective communication skills, substance abuse treatment education and other topics identified by the Department or its employees.

(d) The Parole Division of the Department of Corrections and the Prisoner Review Board shall provide their employees with intensive and ongoing training and professional development services to support the implementation of evidence-based practices. The training and professional development services shall include assessment techniques, case planning, cognitive behavioral training, risk reduction and intervention strategies, effective communication skills, substance abuse treatment education, and other topics identified by the agencies or their employees.

(e) The Department of Corrections, the Prisoner Review Board, and other correctional entities referenced in the policies, rules, and regulations of this Act shall design, implement, and make public a system to evaluate the effectiveness of evidence-based practices in increasing public safety and in successful reintegration of those under supervision into the locality. Annually, each agency shall submit to the Sentencing Policy Advisory Council a comprehensive report on the success of implementing evidence-based practices. The data compiled and analyzed by the Council shall be delivered annually to the Governor and the General Assembly.

(f) The Department of Corrections and the Prisoner Review Board shall release a report annually published on their websites that reports the following information about the usage of electronic monitoring and GPS monitoring as a condition of parole and mandatory supervised release during the prior calendar year:

(1) demographic data of individuals on electronic monitoring and GPS monitoring, separated by the following categories:

(A) race or ethnicity;

(B) gender; and

(C) age;

(2) incarceration data of individuals subject to conditions of electronic or GPS monitoring, separated by the following categories:

(A) highest class of offense for which the individuals are currently serving a term of release; and

(B) length of imprisonment served prior to the current release period;

(3) the number of individuals subject to conditions of electronic or GPS monitoring, separated by the following categories:

(A) the number of individuals subject to monitoring under Section 5-8A-6 of the Unified Code of Corrections;

(B) the number of individuals subject monitoring under Section 5-8A-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections;

(C) the number of individuals subject to monitoring under a discretionary order of the Prisoner Review Board at the time of their release; and

(D) the number of individuals subject to monitoring as a sanction for violations of parole or mandatory supervised release, separated by the following categories:

(i) the number of individuals subject to monitoring as part of a graduated sanctions program; and

(ii) the number of individuals subject to monitoring as a new condition of re-release after a revocation hearing before the Prisoner Review Board;

(4) the number of discretionary monitoring orders issued by the Prisoner Review Board, separated by the following categories:

(A) less than 30 days;

(B) 31 to 60 days;

(C) 61 to 90 days;

(D) 91 to 120 days;

(E) 121 to 150 days;

(F) 151 to 180 days;

(G) 181 to 364 days;

(H) 365 days or more; and

(I) duration of release term;

(5) the number of discretionary monitoring orders by the Board which removed or terminated monitoring prior to the completion of the original period ordered;

(6) the number and severity category for sanctions imposed on individuals on electronic or GPS monitoring, separated by the following categories:

(A) absconding from electronic monitoring or GPS;

(B) tampering or removing the electronic monitoring or GPS device;

(C) unauthorized leaving of the residence;

(D) presence of the individual in a prohibited area; or

(E) other violations of the terms of the electronic monitoring program;

(7) the number of individuals for whom a parole revocation case was filed for failure to comply with the terms of electronic or GPS monitoring, separated by the following categories:

(A) cases when failure to comply with the terms of monitoring was the sole violation alleged; and

(B) cases when failure to comply with the terms of monitoring was alleged in conjunction with other alleged violations;

(8) residential data for individuals subject to electronic or GPS monitoring, separated by the following categories:

(A) the county of the residence address for individuals subject to electronic or GPS monitoring as a condition of their release; and

(B) for counties with a population over 3,000,000, the zip codes of the residence address for individuals subject to electronic or GPS monitoring as a condition of their release;

(9) the number of individuals for whom parole revocation cases were filed due to violations of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 3-3-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections, separated by the following categories:

(A) the number of individuals whose violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 3-3-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections allegedly occurred while the individual was subject to conditions of electronic or GPS monitoring;

(B) the number of individuals who had violations of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 3-3-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections alleged against them who were never subject to electronic or GPS monitoring during their current term of release; and

(C) the number of individuals who had violations of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 3-3-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections alleged against them who were subject to electronic or GPS monitoring for any period of time during their current term of their release, but who were not subject to such monitoring at the time of the alleged violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of Section 3-3-7 of the Unified Code of Corrections.

(Source: P.A. 102-558, eff. 8-20-21; 103-271, eff. 1-1-24.)

(730 ILCS 190/15)

Sec. 15. Adoption, validation, and utilization of an assessment tool.

(a) Purpose. In order to determine appropriate punishment or services which will protect public safety, it is necessary for the State and local jurisdictions to adopt a common assessment tool. Supervision and correctional programs are most effective at reducing future crime when they accurately assess offender risks, assets, and needs, and use these assessment results to assign supervision levels and target programs to criminogenic needs.

(b) After review of the plan issued by the Task Force described in subsection (c), the Department of Corrections, the Parole Division of the Department of Corrections, and the Prisoner Review Board shall adopt policies, rules, and regulations that within 3 years of the effective date of this Act result in the adoption, validation, and utilization of a statewide, standardized risk assessment tool across the Illinois criminal justice system.

(c) (Blank).

(c-5) (Blank).

(d) (Blank).

(Source: P.A. 99-933, eff. 1-27-17.)

(730 ILCS 190/20)

Sec. 20. Adult Redeploy Illinois.

(a) Purpose. When offenders are accurately assessed for risk, assets, and needs, it is possible to identify which people should be sent to prison and which people can be effectively supervised in the locality. By providing financial incentives to counties or judicial circuits to create effective local-level evidence-based services, it is possible to reduce crime and recidivism at a lower cost to taxpayers. Based on this model, this Act hereby creates the Adult Redeploy Illinois program for probation-eligible offenders in order to increase public safety and encourage the successful local supervision of eligible offenders and their reintegration into the locality.

(b) The Adult Redeploy Illinois program shall reallocate State funds to local jurisdictions that successfully establish a process to assess offenders and provide a continuum of locally based sanctions and treatment alternatives for offenders who would be incarcerated in a State facility if those local services and sanctions did not exist. The allotment of funds shall be based on a formula that rewards local jurisdictions for the establishment or expansion of local supervision programs and requires them to pay the amount determined in subsection (e) if incarceration targets as defined in subsection (e) are not met.

(c) Each county or circuit participating in the Adult Redeploy Illinois program shall create a local plan describing how it will protect public safety and reduce the county or circuit's utilization of incarceration in State facilities or local county jails by the creation or expansion of individualized services or programs.

(d) Based on the local plan, a county or circuit shall enter into an agreement with the Adult Redeploy Oversight Board described in subsection (e) to reduce the number of commitments of probation-eligible offenders to State correctional facilities from that county or circuit. The agreement shall include a pledge from the county or circuit to reduce their commitments by 25% of the level of commitments from the average number of commitments for the past 3 years of eligible offenders. In return, the county or circuit shall receive, based upon a formula described in subsection (e), funds to redeploy for local programming for offenders who would otherwise be incarcerated such as management and supervision, electronic monitoring, and drug testing. The county or circuit shall also be penalized, as described in subsection (e), for failure to reach the goal of reduced commitments stipulated in the agreement.

(d-5) Subject to appropriation to the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, the Adult Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board described in subsection (e) may provide grant funds to qualified organizations that can assist local jurisdictions in training, development, and technical assistance.

(e) Adult Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board; members; responsibilities.

(1) The Secretary of Human Services and the Director of Corrections shall within 3 months after January 1, 2010 (the effective date of Public Act 96-761) convene and act as co-chairs of an oversight board to oversee the Adult Redeploy Program. The Board shall include, but not be limited to, designees from the Prisoner Review Board, Office of the Attorney General, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, and Sentencing Policy Advisory Council; the Cook County State's Attorney or a designee; a State's Attorney selected by the President of the Illinois State's Attorneys Association; the State Appellate Defender or a designee; the Cook County Public Defender or a designee; a representative of Cook County Adult Probation, a representative of DuPage County Adult Probation; a representative of Sangamon County Adult Probation; and 4 representatives from non-governmental organizations, including service providers. Members shall serve without compensation but shall be reimbursed for actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties.

(2) The Oversight Board shall within one year after January 1, 2010 (the effective date of Public Act 96-761):

(A) Develop a process to solicit applications from and identify jurisdictions to be included in the Adult Redeploy Illinois program.

(B) Define categories of membership for local entities to participate in the creation and oversight of the local Adult Redeploy Illinois program.

(C) Develop a formula for the allotment of funds to local jurisdictions for local and community-based services in lieu of commitment to the Department of Corrections and a penalty amount for failure to reach the goal of reduced commitments stipulated in the plans.

(D) Develop a standard format for the local plan to be submitted by the local entity created in each county or circuit.

(E) Identify and secure resources sufficient to support the administration and evaluation of Adult Redeploy Illinois.

(F) Develop a process to support ongoing monitoring and evaluation of Adult Redeploy Illinois.

(G) Review local plans and proposed agreements and approve the distribution of resources.

(H) Develop a performance measurement system that includes but is not limited to the following key performance indicators: recidivism, rate of revocations, employment rates, education achievement, successful completion of substance abuse treatment programs, and payment of victim restitution. Each county or circuit shall include the performance measurement system in its local plan and provide data annually to evaluate its success.

(I) Report annually the results of the performance measurements on a timely basis to the Governor and General Assembly.

(3) The Oversight Board shall:

(A) Develop a process to solicit grant applications from eligible training, development, and technical assistance organizations.

(B) Review grant applications and proposed grant agreements and approve the distribution of resources.

(C) Develop a process to support ongoing monitoring of training, development, and technical assistance grantees.

(Source: P.A. 103-8, eff. 6-7-23.)