An interview with Corrections Director Dan Heyns: Ex-sheriff now sees value of re-entry programs

Jul 17, 2011

 

QUESTION: What attracted you to this job?

ANSWER: Most of my career has been in law enforcement, and I've worn all hats. After I had been sheriff for about eight years, I felt it was time for a new challenge. I think the governor hired me because I bring a new perspective -- someone with fresh ideas who wasn't from the old guard. I think he was interested in my public safety background.

Q: As sheriff, you were somewhat critical of the Michigan Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative. Now, as state corrections director, have you changed your views?

A: I came in with some baggage on that, which was probably overstated. I think I got painted with a broad brush of being anti-MPRI, and that's really not true. I understand that prisoner re-entry has to be more than 40 bucks and a bus ticket. I'm getting more educated on the department's re-entry programs. I've come to learn that the program has value and makes sense. We have to do a better job of giving offenders the tools to succeed.

Anyone who knows anything about corrections knows that 95% of these offenders are coming back to (communities). We have to prepare them for that day. The question is how we do it and which programs work and which don't.

It's time to review that process and look at what we're doing and how we can control costs. But it's obvious that we're getting good results with a lot of this stuff. Crime rates are down. The number of people coming back on parole violations is going down. The number of people who are reoffending is going down. To overlook that and trash the program would be a huge mistake. I think we're just going to massage it a bit.

Q: Then do you regret some of the comments you made as sheriff?

A: I don't regret them, because they were made based on my experience down in Jackson. We had a bubble of parolees with new offenses and new charges. That was probably out-of-the-norm for the rest of the state, but that's what I saw. So I don't regret it.

My concerns as a county sheriff, I think, were widely held by a lot of people at the local level -- that MPRI was initiated as a budgetary solution, and that the strategy for dealing with that was just to dump prisoners out on the street. I don't think there's any harm in people saying they have concerns and that they want MDOC to take a look at them. That's how I intend to run this place.

Q: Will there be significant changes in the MPRI program?

A: I almost hesitate to call it MPRI because it has a lot negative connotations with a lot of people in law enforcement. I think it was pretty clear from the audits that there was some badly spent money and mismanaged programs. We continue to review that. We didn't have very tight controls on how the money was spent.

There were some pretty graphic examples of that -- so we're going to tighten up those cost-containment measures. We're going to restore the controls and make sure the money is well spent.

I've been in the job a hot six weeks, so it's a little premature to start rolling some of this out, but I do believe we're going to be a little more focused on the institution. When the offender comes to our doors, we need to assess his needs and what programs he can benefit from while he's still in the institution. When he gets to his earliest release date, he will have accomplished some of this re-entry programming.

I think the focus on institutional programming, versus after they leave, is significant. It's more logical to start working on it from the day our offenders get to us, rather than just warehousing people.

I've talked to inmates and asked them why they're here. Quite frequently, I hear they can't get the programming they need to get out. That made an impression on me. Length of stay is clearly part of the budget issue. I don't think quantity necessarily makes for quality.

Q: At least in theory, though, MPRI was always supposed to start from the first day of custody...

A: It didn't, by the way.

Q: OK, but how do plans to do more institutional programming, which is a great idea, square with, for example, cuts in prison education programs of nearly 25% over the last two years? Don't those cuts hurt what you're trying to do?

A: Well, that's certainly the challenge. I've been here six weeks. I didn't create some of these things. I'm trying to understand all the fine points of those actions, but that's going to take time. I'm getting to the institutions to see firsthand. I agree with you, but I also think there was enough money in this project (MPRI) to reallocate some of it to the institutions, and we're going to do that. We need to better manage the taxpayers' dollars.

Q: As sheriff, you were critical of the increase in parole grants. Should the public now expect parole rates to change?

A: We were moving a lot of people through the parole process, and a lot of us at the local level were concerned about that. Since becoming director, I'm asking a lot of questions about the parole process. I've been impressed with the thoughtfulness of the Parole Board. The analysis of risk factors is significant. Sometimes we lose sight of the big picture: Is Michigan a safer place to live? It's part of my philosophy to not put a lot of pressure on the Parole Board.

Q: So you haven't said anything to them about raising or lowering the number of paroles?

A: No. In fact, what I've said to them is that you're not going to have the director stopping down here saying, I want you to parole that guy, or I don't want you to parole him. We hired them -- the governor appointed them -- to make those decisions. That's what we're paying them to do. I'm convinced that they're doing this in a thoughtful way. The last thing I want to do is interject myself into that and say we need to speed it up or slow it down.

Q: Do you favor expanding post-secondary education for inmates, such as community college classes?

A: It's easy for people to talk about getting tough on crime and throwing away the key, but the reality is we have to do a better job of turning people's lives around.

You mentioned community colleges. I had a close relationship with the community college in Jackson. People would come into the jail and help some offenders get lined up with some of the college services. I don't know if the program got a lot of people into the community college, but I think it was a model for what we ought to do in state corrections as well as county jails.

Obviously, a higher educational degree will help people get a job that pays a living wage and benefits. It will make them into someone who has an investment in society.

Q: Do you expect to close any more prisons in the next year?

A: I don't want to say, one way or the other. Hopefully, if we're doing our jobs and the re-entry piece is working, maybe we won't need as many beds down the line. The (population) trend seems to be good.

Q: But you haven't yet designated any more prisons for closing?

A: Absolutely not. No way.

Q: MDOC eliminated two days of visiting from its prisons, effective June 11. Doesn't that hurt the rebuilding of family ties that the department is supposed to encourage?

A: This job is full of these tough decisions -- and none of them are good. We were under the gun to cut another $42 million this year. Many of our costs are fixed. It's got to come from somewhere.

Q: Despite many changes, prison health care in Michigan is still, based on my reporting, pretty awful. Do you plan to make changes?

A: It's a huge part of our budget and a high priority for me to review it. We have a huge problem with mentally ill people in our facilities. With de-institutionalization, a lot of people ended up in our facilities.

We need to engage in serious discussions with counties about diverting those offenders before they get to us. It's all about what system do they belong in -- and it's not, in my estimation, the corrections system. Mental illness got them into a crime problem but is that the right treatment forum? Absolutely not.

Q: Aside from controlling the population, what other ideas do you have for reducing the department's $2-billion annual budget?

A: It's a little premature to talk about them. Let's save that for the next interview.