By Rod Boshart
The Gazette
DES MOINES — Six men have graduated and been released under court-approved supervision from a program established in 1998 that allows convicted sex offenders to be civilly committed for treatment and rehabilitation after completing their prison terms.
Another 14 patients are being housed in the Civil Commitment Unit for Sexual Offenders (CCUSO) at the Cherokee Mental Health Institute in northwest Iowa and are in transitional release phases of the highly structured inpatient treatment program for violent sexual predators. They have served their prison sentences but in a separate civil trial were found likely to commit further sex offenses.
CCUSO patients are receiving secure treatment services from Iowa Department of Human Services staff, but are supervised upon their court-sanctioned discharge by the state Department of Corrections, which contracts with community-based professionals in the state’s judicial districts.
In the various court-ordered releases, Iowa judges found that the state did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the six committed men should not be discharged under provisions of DHS release plans. In one case, a constitutional objection to any level of supervision was overruled.
State corrections director John Baldwin said all agencies are complying with current law to maximize public safety. But some concerns have arisen as CCUSO patients released from involuntary civil commitment who are no longer on offender status locate in smaller communities that don’t have the treatment resources nor the law enforcement capabilities to track activities covered under release plans that are available in larger cities.
“Honestly, we hesitate to even bring it up because it does sort of push a lot of buttons,” he said. “ ... But it is a reality that we need to address.”
Baldwin, who is retiring as corrections director later this month, said the various entities with oversight and supervisory responsibilities related to the CCUSO program are working to tighten coordination. But he noted that some of the code language is awkward, and he is encouraging Gov. Terry Branstad and legislators to revisit the issue to strengthen elements of the law now that offenders are rejoining society.
For example, Baldwin noted that his agency has spent years developing re-entry programs designed to help offenders being released from incarceration to make the transition to living in a community — programs that have resulted in one of the nation’s lowest recidivism rates for people returning to prison due to violations or new criminal charges.
DHS officials who are put in charge of developing release plans for patients being discharged from CCUSO have expertise in mental health treatment areas but not in assessing risk and developing appropriate strategies for returning them to the community and still having responsibility for them.
“Years ago when this was written, I don’t think anybody ever contemplated the release of these people because it was so far into the future,” Baldwin said. “But now people are being released because Iowa does not want to get sued like Minnesota did, and all at once open the door and say, ‘Go out.’”
Twenty-one states have inpatient treatment programs like CCUSO, according to DHS officials. Courts, in ruling on challenges to civil commitment statutes, have determined that long-term special programs for high-risk offenders such as those in the CCUSO program are constitutional if they provide treatment services and the possibility of eventual release, which Iowa’s system does.
Officials in the Iowa Attorney General’s Office said there are at three cases pending before the Iowa Supreme Court challenging aspects of Iowa’s “release with supervision” statute and possibly more at the district court level.
Also, there are 13 cases in federal court that challenge various aspects of CCUSO’s conditions of confinement — including whether such confinement is constitutional and whether the treatment provided is adequate.
Baldwin said the situation requires a balancing of public safety concerns with legal directives to release patients who have met the terms of their civil commitment into Iowa communities with appropriate treatment services and supervision.
“The staff in corrections has stepped up and so far we seem to be managing,” Baldwin said. “It’s just the fear of the unknown. That’s what we live with every day. It just gets magnified a bit with this type of a person. If something happens, it would be a higher profile, obviously.”
Gov. Branstad, in a recent interview, said he wants to make certain that public safety concerns are addressed.
“I think we’ve got to be really careful about those kinds of situations. We need to look at that,” he said. “We need to have some way to keep track of them just for the safety of the public.”
Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, said Iowa’s law has survived legal challenges and any changes would have to be crafted in a way that passes constitutional muster.
“If there are ways to tighten this up, we’re very open to considering that,” he said.
The five-phase CCUSO program measures and evaluates various stages of development in deterring sexually deviant thoughts and behaviors, coping with stress and managing anger and demonstrating skills in communicating, problem-solving and work habits, according to DHS officials.
Men housed in the special unit receive:
l Therapy
l Educational programming
l Physiological assessments as they progress to the treatment program’s final stages that include supervised day trips with electronic monitoring devices
l Work activities and routine living situations.
“This is very much a court-based process,” said Rick Shults, DHS division administrator for mental health and disability services. To date, no one who has been granted a release plan has reoffended.
Court documents indicate the release plans generally address needs for counseling, medications, community support services, residential and vocational services, alcohol or other drug abuse treatment, sex offender treatments or any other treatment or supervision necessary including electronic monitoring.
“The determination that this is meeting the correct threshold is the determination of the court. We develop a plan and the court reviews the plan and they make the final determination of its acceptability,” Shults said.
“It’s very well defined in the release plan, very specific.”