The Reentry and Sanctions Center: An Opportunity for Enhanced Crime Control 

in Washington, DC 

The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) opened a Reentry and 

Sanctions Center (RSC) in February 2006, providing the city with an important and 

effective tool in crime control. The center provides clinical substance abuse assessment 

and treatment readiness services for men and women on pretrial release, probation, 

parole, or supervised release. 

The Reentry and Sanctions Center is housed in Karrick Hall, a former doctors’ dormitory 

on the grounds of DC General Hospital. The 102-bed center is designed to address the 

relationship between substance abuse and crime. Defendants and offenders who have 

repeatedly abused drugs will reside in a controlled setting and complete a 30-day 

program to develop long-term treatment plans before moving on to a continuum of 

treatment interventions, which will often include inpatient, transitional, and outpatient 

services. 

CSOSA is a federal agency founded in 1997 as part of the DC Revitalization Act’s 

restructuring of several DC criminal justice functions. The agency supervises 

approximately 15,500 individuals on probation, parole or supervised release. The Pretrial 

Services Agency, an independent entity within CSOSA, supervises an additional 8,000 

persons. 

CSOSA’s commitment to the residents of the District of Columbia is to improve public 

safety by employing cost effective, evidence-based practices to supervise criminal 

offenders. By increasing the number of people who complete substance abuse 

assessment, preparation, and a continuum of treatment inventions, CSOSA can make 

more effective use of current substance abuse treatment funds. 

The need for this type of facility in Washington, DC is significant. Nearly two-thirds of 

offenders returned to prison by the United States Parole Commission in 2005 faced 

revocation proceedings for continued drug abuse, not a new arrest. Sixty-five percent of 

probation revocations were drug-related. Despite having an $11 million budget for 

substance abuse treatment during fiscal year 2005, CSOSA was able to provide only 25 

percent of offenders with serious, chronic substance abuse histories with a clinically 

appropriate course of treatment, which often consists of residential, transitional, and 

outpatient interventions. 

The Reentry and Sanctions Center greatly enhances CSOSA’s ability to effectively 

supervise substance-abusing offenders. The first focus of the center’s programming is 

accurate clinical assessment, the goal of which is to develop an individualized treatment 

plan that maps out a long-term continuum of treatment. Offenders and defendants agree 

to the treatment plan by signing a behavioral contract, which spells out increasingly 

severe consequences for failure to complete the program or adhere to the rules of 

supervision. 

Drafted by Bryan Young, (202) 220-5308, bryan.young@csosa.gov 
The program’s second major focus is treatment readiness, which consists of interventions 

designed to prepare individuals for the treatment continuum that will follow release from

the RSC. Included in this process are a series of cognitive behavioral interventions 

designed to enhance offenders’ motivation to change. The old adage that you cannot 

treat addiction until an addict asks for help contains an element of truth. It is more 

accurate to say that with the proper preparation, you can make a person in need of 

treatment more willing to accept help when it is offered. 

The cost-benefit ratio of treating serious offenders with long-term substance abuse 

histories is attractive. Researchers evaluating the cost effectiveness of treatment 

programs in California found that for every $1 spend on treatment society saves between 

$4 and $10 in reduced crime and public health costs. An oft-cited Rand Corporation 

study maintains that for every $1 spent on treatment society saves $7. 

Recent analyses of treatment show that the best results come with the most serious 

offenders. Returns diminish with offenders who present lower risk and less severe 

patterns of dependence. In a 1999 study, researchers at Texas Christian University found 

that seventy-four percent of high-risk parolees who completed both in-prison and 

community-based treatment did not return to prison within three years. In comparison, 

forty-eight percent of high-risk parolees who did not receive in-prison treatment or 

aftercare in the community returned to prison within three years. 

The return on the money invested in treatment is greater for high-risk than for low-risk 

parolees. The same Texas study found that it took $165 to reduce reincarceration rates by 

1 percent for high-risk offenders. For low-risk offenders, it took approximately $500 to 

reduce the reinarceration rate by 1 percent. 

In the District of Columbia, we have experienced positive results from using the former 

Assessment and Orientation Center, which is the program upon which the new Reentry 

and Sanctions Center is based. An independent review conducted by University of 

Maryland researchers in 2001 found that in the twelve months following participation in 

the center, compared to the twelve months before it, the arrest rate of participants fell by 

35 percent. 

The Reentry and Sanctions Center provides a cost effective, evidence-based model of 

substance abuse treatment preparation for the most serious offenders who are being 

supervised in the community. The goal is that a significant number of those offenders 

will present a reduced threat to public safety. The Reentry and Sanctions Center has the 

potential to be one of the most cost effective tools CSOSA has to contribute to crime 

control in this city. 

Drafted by Bryan Young, (202) 220-5308, bryan.young@csosa.gov 
References 

Blankenship, J. Dansereau, D.F., Simpson, D.D. (1999). Cognitive enhancements of 

readiness for corrections-based treatment for drug abuse. The Prison Journal, 79 

(4), 431-445. 

Butzin, C.A., Martin, S.S., Jamse, M.A., Inciardi, J.A. (2002). Evaluating component 

effects of a prison-based treatment continuum. Journal of Substance Abuse 

Treatment, 22 (2002), 63-69. 

Evidence-based adult corrections programs: What works and what does not (2006). 

Washington State Institute for Public Policy. 

Gerstein, D. R., Johnson, R. A., Harwood, H. J., Fountain, K., Suter, N., & Malloy, K. 

(1994). Evaluating recovery services: The California drug and alcohol treatment 

assessment (CALDATA) general report. Sacramento: California Department of 

Alcohol & Drug Programs. 

Griffith, J. D., Hiller, M. L., Knight, K., & Simpson, D. D. (1999) A cost-effectiveness 

analysis of in-prison therapeutic community treatment and risk classification. The 

Prison Journal, 79, no. 3, 352-368. 

Taxman, F. (2004). The effect of the W/B HIDTA-funded substance abuse treatment 

continuum on arrest rates of criminals entering treatment in calendar year 2001. 

College Park, MD: Institute for Behavior and Health.