Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Howard County committee approves work‑release manual updates and in‑home detention incentives
Summary
The Howard County Community Corrections Committee approved revisions to the work‑release participant manual and adopted a new incentive‑based in‑home detention program intended to add graduated, low‑cost privileges; the incentive program passed with one recorded nay.
Get email alerts on the Corrections Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Howard County Community Corrections Committee members approved revisions to the work‑release participant manual (PPM) and adopted an incentive‑based in‑home detention program at their meeting.
Committee member Mr. Levelvel introduced the PPM revisions and thanked in‑home and work‑release staff for drafting the changes. "I just want to say thank you to the inhome uh staff and the work release staff," Mr. Levelvel said, before members moved and approved adoption of the revised PPM.
Mr. Levelvel described the incentive program as a stepwise approach to allow people on in‑home detention to earn additional privileges for compliance, including clean drug screens, being where they are required to be, and timely completion of required paperwork. "...just to give them more opportunity to show ... they are doing better," he said, while outlining non‑cost incentives and gradual increases in community activity as participants progress.
The committee voted to adopt the incentive program; the motion carried on a voice vote with one recorded nay from Mr. McCann. Committee members did not specify implementation dates in the meeting minutes; staff will circulate finalized program documents to voting members as part of the packet materials.
The changes affect both the supervised work‑release population and people serving in‑home detention under community supervision. No new budget dollars were requested during the vote; Mr. Levelvel and staff framed the program as relying primarily on non‑monetary incentives and established supervision practices.
The committee adjourned the Community Corrections portion of the meeting and moved to JRACK business after approving the program.

