9.9. Community Residential Facilities 
DAVID CARTER 
Moving up in the continuum of correctional sanctions, CCCs would be considered the last stop before 
a lengthy jail or prison sentence, as they can have the highest level of containment. These are often 
called CCCs (Community Correctional Centers), TCs (Transition Centers), or CBCFs (Community-Based 
Correctional Facilities), and other names. From this point, these variations will all be considered as CBCFs, 
as there is a blending of the names to the variety of missions that are within these facilities. However, even 
two community residential facilities with the same name can be different, as the functions of CBCFs can 
be multifaceted. CBCFs can function similarly to a halfway house, it can provide a stop for individuals 
just checking in for the day before they go off to their jobs, they can be used for outpatient services, even 
residential services where there is a need for public control/safety. 
The overall benefit of CBCFs is their ability to have an increased focus in rehabilitation, at a lower 
cost than a State institution. This is where their greatest effect can materialize if there is adherence to the 
principles of effective intervention. As we touched on in the first section on punishment, the principles 
of effective intervention have been demonstrated to have the best impacts on reductions in recidivism. 
Collectively, we call these the PEI. These include concepts like proper identification of criminogenic risks 
and needs of offenders, using evidence-based programs that address these items, matching and sorting clients 
appropriately, and responsivity in terms of programs and services. For a detailed account of how the PEI 
integrates into community corrections, see a very detailed report by the National Institute of Corrections, 
under the U.S. Department of Justice: https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/019342.pdf . 
CBCF Success 
What should come as no surprise, as is the theme with correctional practices in the community, CBCFs 
have mixed results. This is largely dependent on the composition of the facility, the individuals within the 
facility, and the programs offered. When individuals are lumped together, in non-directive programs that do 
not adhere to the PEI, the outcomes of CBCFs are not favorable over the jail, prison, or probation. However, 
when CBCFs separate offenders based on risk, putting more programming with the higher risk clients, and 
little programming on the low-level clients, the outcomes are substantially better. For example, in a study 
on CBCFs, Lowenkamp and Latessa (2004) found that when the offenders were separated by their risk, 
targeting higher-risk individuals, much larger reductions in recidivism can be achieved. 
1 
1. Lowenkamp, C.T., & Latessa, E.J. (2004). Residential community corrections and the risk principle: Lessons learned in Ohio. Ohio 
Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Research Compendium, 2: 245-254. 
363