Transcript Slide 1

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY PUBLIC
SAFETY REALIGNMENT
DATA COLLECTION AND EVALUATION EFFORTS
• Contracted with the San Joaquin
Community Data Co-Op
• 11 year relationship with
evaluation work
• Funds from one-time planning
grant
– Identification of data collection
variables
– Construction of AB109 data
framework
– Training to CCP
members/partner agencies
– Constructing AB109 logic model
AB109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT LOGIC MODEL - DRAFT
Situation
Due to prison overcrowding
in the State of California,
the California State
Assembly passed AB109.
Effective October 1, 2011,
this legislative bill calls for
non-serious, non-violent,
and non-sex offenders to
be sentenced locally at the
county level. These
offenders are sentenced as
LCS cases or Local
Community Supervision
and either receive straight
jail time or a split sentence.
In addition, as part of this
process, the State of
California began releasing
offenders from State Prison
that fell under the above
definition. These
individuals, referred to as
PRCS or Post Release
Community Supervision
cases report locally to
Probation who leads this
realignment effort. This
process also includes State
parole violators.
Collaborative Partners
 County Board of
Supervisors
 Probation
 Superior Court
 Sheriff’s Office
 Correctional Health
Care
 Municipal Police
Departments
 District Attorney’s
Office
 Public Defender’s
Office
 Behavioral Health
Services
 Human Services Agency
 WorkNet
 SJCOE
Inputs
 AB109 Funding
 Personnel involved in or
dedicated to AB109:
o Probation
o Superior Court
o Sheriff
o BHS
o HSA
o WorkNet
o Etc.
 Time
o AB109 Plan
o CCP planning,
coordination, and
meetings
o Workgroups
o AB109
implementation
process (review,
structure, steps,
contacts, system)
 Other agency partners
 Infrastructure
o Assessment Center
o Jail and inmate
housing
o High Risk Unit
 Community members
 Technology
 FAYS
 All other members of
the CCP
Outputs/Activities
Short-term outcomes
CCP meetings (Full CCP,
Executive Committee, and
workgroups)
Enhancement of
AB109 CCP and partner
collaboration
The processing of all AB109
cases (611 packets from
State prison and LCS cases
from County Jail)
Enhancement of
community supervision
and systemic practices
in San Joaquin County
Local Court sentencing of
AB109 cases (LCS local
offenses and PRCS
revocations)
Client completion of
AB109 programs
(community referrals)
Day to day programming
and supervision by
Probation, Sheriff’s Office,
and Correctional Health
Operation of the
Assessment Center, the Day
Reporting Center, and the
High Risk Unit
Referrals for PRCS and LCS
cases to community based
partners
Provision of services to
AB109 clients by community
partners
Long-term outcomes
 Completion of EBP
 Decrease in
recidivism
o Arrests
o Revocations
o Convictions
 Successful
implementation of
initial AB109
framework in San
Joaquin County (after
one year)
AB109 REALIGNMENT: DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK
PROBATION
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Superior Court
• # of Re-Entry Court
participants
• Compliance with the
provider
• Compliance with the
case manager
• Compliance with the
judge
• # of successful court reentry completions
WorkNet
• # of program participants
that participate in and
successfully complete the
workshops offered
• # of program participants
that are able to secure all
necessary right to work
documents (I-9)
• # of program participants
that obtain jobs, etc.
AB109 Cases
Demographics
Risk level
Recidivism
Arrests
Revocations
Convictions
Etc.
Sheriff’s Office
CHS
BHS
• # of 3056s
• # of Post Release Community
Supervision offenders
sentenced to jail
• Length of stay for Post
Release Community
Supervision Revocations
• # of inmates released to
alternative custody options
• # of mandated health
assessments
• # of individualized treatment
plans for inmates receiving
medical care
• # of triage requests
• # of sick call visits
• # of clinic services
• # of dental services
• # of mental health services
• # of diagnostic studies, etc.
• # of referrals for assessment
• # of referrals for assessment
completed within 5 working
days
• # of referrals for medication
assessment
• # of referrals for medication
assessments completed
within 10 working days
• # of referrals for crisis
intervention, etc.
SJCOE
HSA
FAYS
DRC/County Jail/Youth Build
• GED completion
• High School Diploma or
Certificate of Completion
County Jail
• Adult Education Diploma
• Life Skills Completion
Youth Build
• ROP Certification
• Test of Adult Basic Education
in Math and Reading
• # of participants screenings
• # of General Assistance
approvals
• # of General Assistance
denials
• # of referrals to other HSA
programs and outcome
• # of offenders who
successfully complete
assigned community service
hours
• # of community service hours
completed
• Improved employment skills
• Increased interpersonal skills
• Pre/Post Communication
skills assessment.
•
Tracking data on overall approach,
overall project outcomes and
impact
•
Data analysis
•
Preparing reports
•
Recidivism data
•
Key informant interviews
•
Data collection and evaluation
process address:
– Organizational development
– Collaboration
– Evidence based principles
•
8 funded agencies
•
Multiple databases/tracking
•
Inability to run queries
Probation CMS
•
Probation/Sheriff’s Office
varying timeframes
•
Inconsistent definitions
•
Cross referencing data
•
Created Access database
•
All data goes to Probation
•
Streamlining of what is
reported
•
Creation of
•
•
•
Monthly Data Dashboard
(January 2012 through
September 2012)
Comprehensive Data
Dictionary
AB109 Glossary
AB109 DASHBOARD
(January 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012)
STRAIGHT VS. SPLIT SENTENCES
Straight Sentences
REPORTED TO PROBATION
Split Sentences
LCS
PRCS
PRCS expected
494
600
400
300
67%
263
366
400
200
70
100
46
0
60%
40%
Jan-Mar
81
33
112
71%
29%
Apr-Jun
50
69%
31%
200
33%
129
167
213
113
157
86
16 78%
14 72%
29
Jan-Mar
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
74%
124
59
69%
0
Jul-Sep
Total
Total
PRCS/LCS REVOCATIONS FILED
Jan - Mar
Count
%
Apr - Jun
Count
Jul - Sep
%
Count
%
Count
%
Initial FTR
47 41.2%
43 32.8%
33 22.3%
123 31.3%
Subsequent FTR
64 56.1%
73 55.7%
114 77.0%
251 63.9%
Other
3
2.6%
TOTAL
114
100%
15 11.5%
131
100%
1
0.7%
19
4.8%
148
100%
393
100%
JAIL IMPACT
LCS/PRCS Processed
TOTAL
RETURN TO CUSTODY
3056 Processed
Total AB109's Processed
2205
2500
1916
2000
Jan-Mar
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
1000
800
445
600
1500
1000
639
500
40
641
636
109
400
781
745
679
140
200
289
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
Total
251
199
192
0
0
Jan-Mar
317
3056 w/o
new
charges
105
3056 w/
new
charges
100
84
31
PRCS w/o
new
charges
67
59
45
PRCS w/
new
charges
8
5
1
LCS w/o
new
charges
2
5
4
LCS w/
new
charges
AB109 DASHBOARD
(January 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012)
STRAIGHT VS. SPLIT SENTENCES
Straight Sentences
Split Sentences
400
350
300
250
263
67%
129
33%
200
150
100
50
70
46
60%
40%
112
81
71%
33
29%
50
69%
31%
0
Jan-Mar
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
Total
AB109 DASHBOARD
(January 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012)
REPORTED TO PROBATION
LCS
PRCS
PRCS expected
600
494
366
400
74%
213
157
167
200
113
78%
124
86
16
14 72%
29 69%
Jan-Mar
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
59
0
Total
AB109 DASHBOARD
(January 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012)
PRCS/LCS REVOCATIONS FILED
Jan - Mar
Count
Apr - Jun
%
Count
Jul - Sep
%
Count
TOTAL
%
Count
%
Initial FTR
47
41.2%
43
32.8%
33
22.3%
123
31.3%
Subsequent FTR
64
56.1%
73
55.7%
114
77.0%
251
63.9%
Other
3
2.6%
15
11.5%
1
0.7%
19
4.8%
TOTAL
114
100%
131
100%
148
100%
393
100%
AB109 DASHBOARD
(January 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012)
JAIL IMPACT
LCS/PRCS Processed
3056 Processed
Total AB109's Processed
2205
2500
1916
2000
1500
639
500
40
781
745
679
1000
641
636
109
140
289
0
Jan-Mar
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
Total
AB109 DASHBOARD
(January 1, 2012 - September 30, 2012)
RETURN TO CUSTODY
Jan-Mar
Apr-Jun
Jul-Sep
1000
800
445
600
400
251
317
199
200
192
0
3056 w/o
new
charges
105
3056 w/
new
charges
100
84
31
PRCS w/o
new
charges
67
59
45
PRCS w/
new
charges
8
5
1
LCS w/o
new
charges
2
5
4
LCS w/ new
charges
•
One of the first in the State
with Year 1 Plan approved
•
Overall collaboration and
partnership (including State
Parole)
•
Improved communication
•
Changes in
policies/procedures/practices
•
Creation of new programs
Collaboration among various law enforcement agencies has intensified in
response to AB109. While AB109 has forced agencies to work together more
because of budget cuts, and being short staffed, I feel that the “County has
always had a sense of cooperation”. However, agencies have had to “back each
other up” more than ever before with the implementation of AB109.
- San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge
October 2011 – SEPTEMBER 2012
•
878 PRCS cases the first year of
realignment
– 796 (90.7%) males
– 82 (9.3%) females
•
Age range:
– Average age: 36.6
•
Cases Status
– 504 (57.4%) were referred to High Risk
Unit
– 177 (20.2%) were referred to the Day
Reporting Center
RACE/ETHNICITY
American Indian
COUNT
%
4
0.5%
51
5.8%
Black
Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
221
25.2%
2
0.2%
Hispanic
315
35.9%
White
269
30.6%
Other
11
1.3%
5
0.6%
Asian
Unknown
ARRESTING AGENCY
CA State Parole
COUNT
%
1
0.3%
19
5.7%
2
0.6%
Lodi PD
18
5.4%
Manteca PD
12
3.6%
Ripon PD
2
0.6%
Sacramento Co.
3
0.9%
SJC Probation
8
2.4%
120
36.1%
1
0.3%
116
34.9%
SUSD PD
7
2.1%
Tracy PD
16
4.8%
UOP PD
7
2.1%
CHP
Delta College PD
SJC Sheriff’s Office
Solano County
Stockton PD
AT LEAST ONE
Count
%
Totals for those suffering recidivism
1
2
3
4
%
%
%
%
Arrest
232
26.4% 70.3%
20.3%
6.0%
3.0%
New Charge
142
16.2% 84.5%
11.3%
2.8%
1.4%
Revocation
122
13.9% 77.9%
16.4%
3.3%
2.5%
Conviction
11
-----
-----
-----
1.3%
-----
Arrests
50%
40%
30%
43.2%
Data analysis specific to
ethnicity and age were not
statistically significant.
27.7%
15.5%
12.3%
20%
10%
0%
1.4%
* Please note that these
results are statistically
significant p ≤ .05
A total of 552 LCS cases the first year of realignment.
SPLIT SENTENCES
STRAIGHT SENTENCES
– 360 (65.2%) split sentences
– 192 (34.8%) straight sentences
– Jail Sentence
– 1.8 years (average sentence length)
– 4 months (shortest sentence)
– 7 years (longest sentence)
– Jail Sentence
– Community Supervision
– 1.6 years (average sentence length)
– 6 months (shortest sentence)
– 4.3 years (longest sentence)
– Total Average Sentence
– 3.4 years (average sentence length)
– 1.3 years (shortest sentence)
– 8 years (longest sentence)
– 2.1 years (average sentence length)
– 8 months (shortest sentence)
– 6 years (longest sentence)
•
The County Jail processed
2205 AB109 offenders
– January 1, 2012 through
September 30, 2012
•
In-custody programs offered
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Anger Management
Creative Conflict Resolution
Creative Writing
GED
Life Skills
Office Technology
Ownership
Parenting
Substance Abuse
•
340 active cases as of the end
of September
•
Additional 137 with
outstanding bench warrants
AB109 HIGH RISK UNIT CLIENT KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS
Every client that participated in the interview (6
out of 6) indicated that they felt very
comfortable with their Probation Officer.
• For one individual, having their Probation
Officer to confide in was mentioned as the
best part of this process.
• Another client said, “[I was] fortunate to
have [my Probation Officer, he] always came
out and [was] real positive. [He] always gave
pats on the back when I’m doing good, and
those little things help a lot.”
• When asked if the process of community
supervision has been a help, one stated “Yes,
knowing that I had more than just my family,
mom, and myself to answer to.”
FEEDBACK FROM AB109 HIGH RISK UNIT CLIENT INTERVIEWS
Outside of prison, and under Community
Supervision, some of these individuals are seeing a
difference in themselves and have high hopes for
their future.
• One probationer stated, “Today I am
responsible, prompt. If I tell you I am going to
be somewhere, I’ll be there.”
• Others indicated that they are more family
oriented, and more responsible. A few of these
individuals are making their way to college, and
working towards a better future for
themselves, and, for some, their children.
• One of these clients summed up much of what
others were saying when they spoke of being
“broken” when released from prison, but now
this individual expressed they are “living now,
not surviving.”
(Caption 2)
FEEDBACK FROM AB109 HIGH RISK UNIT CLIENT INTERVIEWS
• The most challenging part for several
of these individuals is depending on
family and friends for places to stay
and transportation to their
appointments.
• Other obstacles included dealing with
other obligations along with trying to
complete mandated classes. However,
the majority of the interviewees
indicated that their Probation Officers
understood any issue they came to
them with.
• One participant stated, “these people
aren’t unreasonable; they’re willing to
work with you.”
(Caption 3)
•
229 clients enrolled during
the first year of realignment
– 209 (91.3%) males
– 20 (8.7%) females
•
Age range: 18 – 59
– Average age: 31.2
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
37.1%
23.1%
21.8%
14.4%
2.2%
1.3%
100%
85.1%
58.3%
80%
40.8%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Employment
* Please note that n = 228
Aggression
Education
50%
37.1%
40%
23.1%
21.8%
30%
20%
10%
0%
PRCS
* Please note that n = 207
LCS
Both
REFERRAL AGENCY
COUNT
%
Moral Reconation Training (MRT)
229
100%
Job Readiness
140
61.1%
Drug/Alcohol
39
17.0%
Education
30
13.1%
CBT Substance Abuse
20
8.7%
Re-referred to Education
6
2.6%
Human Services Agency, Behavioral Health Services,
Residential Program, etc.
6
2.6%
Domestic Violence
2
0.9%
•
87 offenders were referred to
Compliance Court
– 84 (96.6%) were PRCS cases
– 3 (8.7%) were LCS cases
•
Compliance
– 51 (58.6%) were compliant with provider
– 54 (62.1%) were compliant with the case
manager
– 52 (59.8%) were compliant with the
judge
7 (8.0%) clients had a successful re-entry
court completion.
•
81 (93.1%) offenders were referred
to substance abuse program
– 30 (37.0%) were residential
– 32 (39.5%) were out-patient
– 19 (23.5%) did not have a specific
referral
•
28 (32.2%) individuals had a second
referral
•
294 offenders were assessed by
Behavioral Health Services
– 274 (93.2%) were PRCS cases
– 11 (3.7%) were LCS cases
–
9 (3.1%)
•
The average number of days after
referred to be assessed was 3.9 days.
–
30 (10.2%) had a medication
assessment done
– 184 (62.6%) had BHA assessment done
– 187 (63.6%) had ASI assessment done
•
474 AB109 offenders were screened
by HSA
– 40 individuals were screened more than
once
•
121 (25.5%) individuals were first
assessed as being homeless.
RECEIVING
SERVICES
PENDING
Count
%
Count
%
General Assistance
269
56.8%
6
2.2%
Food Stamp Employment Training (FSET)
198
41.8%
6
1.3%
2
0.4%
3
0.6%
221
46.7%
8
1.7%
0
0.0%
2
0.4%
Medi-Cal
CalFresh (SNAP)
Cash Aid
– 267 (56.3%) AB109 clients received vouchers
– Ranging from $5.00 - $75.00 and
– A total of $12,630 was awarded for the year
– Only 1 person was receiving money for warrant
– A total of $14.00
– 7 (1.5%) offenders received money for rent
– Ranging from $61.00 – $185.00
– A total of $810.00 were awarded for the year
•
A total of 368 individuals took
part in WorkNet
– 4 were returning clients
•
Of the 368 cases, 79 (21.5%)
were in workshops
•
The average workshops
attended was 3
– Everyone who attended the
workshops completed
•
30 (8.2%) participants have secured 1-9 (right to work) documents
•
23 (6.3%) individuals obtained a job
•
Job wages range from $8.00 to $15.00 an hour
JOB SECTORS INCLUDED
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Administrative assistant
Auto Body & Repair Trainee
Electronic Installer Trainee
General Labor
Glass Fabrication
Janitor/Event Worker
Lead Framer Department
Masker/Prep
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2)
(4)
(1)
(1)
(1)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Packager
Pellet Jack Driver
Pellet Operator
Retail/Stock Clerk
Stock Clerk
Stock Clerk/Retail
Truck Driver
Warehouse
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2)
(1)
•
19 clients had taken part
in the educational
component through the
Day Reporting Center
(one.Canlis school)
•
85 clients enrolled in GED
classes while at the
County Jail
– 8 clients completed
their GED testing
* Please note that this data is from October 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012.
• Longitudinal tracking of
outcomes including recidivism
data
• Focus on what services might
affect recidivism
–
–
–
–
–
Risk level
Employment status
Housing status
Substance abuse issues
Mental health issues
• Evaluation work centering on
cost effectiveness
• Key informant interviews
• Collection and analysis of police
crime data
• On-going implementation and
collaboration
• Enhancement of approach
– Planning and implementation of
pre-trial assessment and
supervision tool and procedures
– Establish
– Violent Crimes Unit
– CCP Law Enforcement
Task Force
– Parole Re-Entry Court
– High Violent Offenders
Court
– Collaboration with local CBOs
for additional case management
– Establishment of a Warrant
Reduction and Advocacy
Program
– Implementation of Operation
Ceasefire
• On-going data collection
– Year 1 Evaluation Report
– AB109 Phase 2 Evaluation
QUESTIONS