With reference to my introduction as well, I think our members work exceedingly hard at the interventions, and we work within a system that's been designed and is predicated on a scenario whereby, when an offender enters into the system, they're going to be offered opportunities to rehabilitate or learn different ways of being and thinking, in order that they might make that transition.
In an ideal circumstance, whether they started in a medium institution or in a maximum, it is hoped that they can transition down and cascade through medium and into minimum, while having these interventions and making changes all along the way, and being assessed by a parole officer in a global manner. They're taking into consideration the program reports that are being written by the program officers, anything that might come out of the psychological department and out of the educational department, in addition to the empirical measures that are put in place. If they are successful in moving through that into the community, we have seen that they generally are more successful, because they are preparing to re-enter society after being institutionalized.
It's a real thing, and it takes time to work through. We know that their foray into the community during the first 30 days is extremely stressful. We see the best results for those who achieve a day parole, typically through cascading through the system.
Based on the way our system is designed, that's the manner in which our members work through the policies and the commissioner's directives that are in place. If there are any changes to those or how those work, however those changes come, it is our hope that the resources follow so that we can appropriately intervene and provide the guidance and support they need to continue working through that model.