COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP MEETING...2015/02/16 · Correctional Program Checklist (CPC)...

1 1

SAN DIEGO COUNTY COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP MEETING

FEBRUARY 16, 2016

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=https://sdparalegals.org/our-community/volunteer-opportunities/&ei=cmywVLC9FIKxggSTw4HoDQ&bvm=bv.83339334,d.eXY&psig=AFQjCNGJ6i_DKTMv9liOpNY7RpQQV92FSQ&ust=1420934628772610http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http://www.elcajonpolice.org/&ei=eG2wVJOhGJPmgwSr44L4Dg&psig=AFQjCNHqAAuTM0tG-SG9cpV_MONKRZ9a2w&ust=1420934873832198

2

PROBATION: SB 678 PLAN UPDATE

Jason Druxman, Probation Division Chief

2


SB 678 Funding History

• Implementation of SB 678 began in FY 2009/10 using a performance-based funding formula.

• From FY 2010/11 through FY 2012/13 probation departments received a portion of the state’s savings in incarceration costs resulting from the reduction in the probation failure rate (PFR).

• Funding formula for FY 2010/11 – FY 2012/13: Probation Revocations & New Commitments to Prison + Probation Revocations & New Commitment to Local Prison (Jail)

Average Probation Population During Reporting Period

3

SB 678 Funding Formula Changes

• In FY 2013/14, SB 678 was modified due to the impact of the 2011 Public Safety Realignment Act to include probationers returning to local county jail.

• In FY 2015/16, SB 678 was updated to include the total prison returns for all individuals under felony probation (probation, mandatory supervision and post-release community supervision) and refocuses revocations to state prison only.

• New Funding Formula: Probation + PRCS + MS Revocations & New Commitment to State Prison

Average Probation + PRCS + MS Population During Reporting Period

4

Probation Failure Rate

• Initially, a baseline PFR of 7.96% (based on the PFR from 2006-2008) was used to calculate the amount of savings to be provided to each probation department.

• In 2015, the funding formula was once again updated to measures each county’s performance against the statewide failure rates using a new baseline PFR of 5.02% (based on the PFR from 2013).

5

San Diego County Probation Failure Rate (New formula)

6

SB 678 Revocations Calendar Year 2014 2015

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Probation Population 15,999 16,095 16,234 15,786 14,943 14,110 14,463 13,578

MS Population 366 450 538 571 567 554 594 618

PRCS Population 2,298 2,295 2,670 2,353 2,290 2,263 2,259 2,242

All Populations 18,663 18,840 19,442 18,710 17,800 16,927 17,316 16,438

Probation Revocations 242 216 196 205 177 179 137 147

MS Revocations 1 2 0 0 3 1 1 1

PRCS Revocations 94 79 70 72 33 46 46 38

All Revocations 337 297 266 277 213 226 184 186

Total Prison Returns 1,177 809

Average Population 18,914 17,120

Probation Failure Rate 6.22% 4.73%

7

SB 678 Revocations

8

SB 678 Funding for FY 2016/17

For FY 2016/17 the funding formula is comprised of two key elements and targets terminal revocations to state prison:

1. Base allocation - Each county is provided with a percentage of the largest previously received payment.

2. Incentive fund – Payment is based on the difference between the baseline (expected) number and the actual number of revocations to state prison.

9

SB 678 Funding 10

SB 678 Treatment and Intervention Services 11

• January 2015 through June 2016

• $1,000,000

Employment Services

• FY 2015/16

• $250,000

Cognitive Behavioral Treatment

• FY 2015/16

• $200,000

Residential Treatment Services (Substance Abuse) *Currently in the procurement process

SB 678 Services Provided in 2015

391

96

167

57

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Referred Engaged

Employment Services CBT

12

Next Steps

• SB 678 Workgroup with Partners

• Review current providers/resources

• Look at additional resources (possibly TH)

13

14 14


FEBRUARY 16, 2016


15

PROBATION:

PROP 47 PROBATION IMPACT UPDATE

Jennifer Effie, Probation Business Intelligence Manager

15


PROP 47 TIMELINE

• Nov 2014: Passage of Prop 47 acts to reduce the classification of most nonserious and nonviolent property and drug crimes from a felony to a misdemeanor. It additionally permits the resentencing for anyone currently serving a sentence for any of the offenses the initiative reduced to misdemeanors. Early analysis indicated a potential impact of approximately 25% to Probation’s adult population

• Apr 2015: After their review of in-custody Prop 47 petitions, the District Attorney begins their review and processing of Probation petitions

• Jan 2016: District Attorney reports the completion of their review and processing of Probation Prop 47 petitions

• Mar 2016: Estimated final processing of Prop 47 related closures by Probation staff

CURRENT POPULATION TRENDS & ANALYSIS

• Monitoring and analysis • Weekly review and report out of adult population trends

• Regular communication with the District Attorney

• District Attorney reports an approximate 50% relief rate of petitions being reviewed under Prop 47

• Probation determines that of those individuals with cases eligible for closure, 7% of the PRO (MS and PRCS) population and 25% of the Formal Probation population remain under some form of continued supervision

• Population changes as of January 2016: • Overall: 13% decrease

• MS: 11% increase

• PRCS: 8% decrease

• Formal Probation: 15% decrease

OVERALL PROJECTIONS

Overall adult population projection: 17% decrease

10,787 10,805 10,738 10,569 10,437 10,275 10,183 10,088 9,909 9,814 9,673 9,565 9,498 9,183 9,224 8,878

2,332 2,352 2,324 2,348 2,401 2,325 2,279 2,278 2,280 2,310 2,372 2,322 2,276

2,244 2,247 2,039

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16

Total FORMAL PROBATION Total PRO DIVISION

PRO DIVISION PROJECTIONS

MS population projection: 11% increase

PRCS population projection: 20% decrease

1,773 1,772 1,754 1,773 1,823 1,739 1,697 1,695 1,705 1,722 1,763 1,720 1,666 1,615 1,629 1,418

477 505 499 494 504

505 499 491 486 499

515 507

516 537 531

530

82 75 71 81 74

81 83 92 89 89

94 95

94 92 87

91

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000


PRCS MS PRO Sex Offenders

FORMAL PROBATION PROJECTIONS

Overall Formal Probation projection: 18% decrease High Risk: 23% decrease High Risk SO: 5% decrease Medium Risk: 15% decrease Low Risk: 17% decrease

5,232 5,222 5,212 5,145 5,059 5,022 4,978 4,953 4,846 4,826 4,790 4,704 4,637 4,525 4,518 4,350

2,174 2,208 2,185 2,135 2,171 2,199 2,109 2,057 2,047 2,056 1,982 2,005 2,040 1,948 1,944 1,842

2,962 2,958 2,919 2,867 2,789 2,638 2,683 2,655 2,584 2,520 2,490 2,444 2,414 2,320 2,360

2,286

419 417 422 422 418 416 413 423 432 412 411 412 407

390 402 400

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000


Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk High Risk - Sex Offenders

Next Steps

• Completion of Prop 47 related case closures

• Continued engagement with the DA, including an additional reconciliation of data

• Ongoing weekly monitoring for point of population stability

• Regular monitoring of new legislation or policies which may impact the Probation population

22 22


FEBRUARY 16, 2016


23

PROBATION POST RELEASE DIVISION RECIDIVISM UPDATE

Scott Huizar, Probation Division Chief

23


“The percentage of Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS) and Mandatory Supervision (MS) offenders supervised in the PRO Division who completed supervision without a new conviction during the period of supervision.”

24

Recidivism Rates FY 13/14 & 14/15

Success to Recidivism Ratios FY 13/14 & 14/15

70%

64%

30%

36%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

14/15

13/14Recidivism

Success

25

1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

2013/2014 72% (340 of 470)

67%

(350 of 521)

59%

(296 of 500)

57%

(264 of 460)

2014/2015 65% (294 of 455)

82%

(412 of 504)

69%

(410 of 598)

64%

(358 of 563)



64%

61%

36%

39%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

14/15

13/14Recidivism

Success

26


2013/2014 73% (275 of 378)

65%

(283 of 436)

53%

(214 of 402)

55%

(218 of 395)

2014/2015 61% (227 of 370)

77%

(272 of 355)

62%

(272 of 437)

57%

(238 of 418)

27



86%

76%

14%

24%

0% 50% 100%

14/15

13/14Recidivism

Success


2013/2014 71% (65 of 92)

79%

(67 of 85)

84%

(82 of 98)

71%

(46 of 65)

2014/2015 79% (67 of 85)

94%

(140 of 149)

86%

(138 of 161)

83%

(120 of 145)

Court Oversight

Collaboration with Judicial Partners

Partnership with Treatment Providers

Seamless Relationship with Local Law Enforcement

Probation Officer Engagement with Offender ◦ Assessment, Planning, Linking, Monitoring and

Advocacy

Adherence to Evidence Based Principles

28

29 29


FEBRUARY 16, 2016


30

2015 ADULT FIELD SERVICES REFERRALS COMMUNITY RESOURCE DIRECTORY

Dr. Geoff Twitchell, Treatment Director — Probation

30


CRD Referrals 2015 Adult Field Services

AB 109 Offenders

PRCS: 4,417 77%

MSO: 1,328 23%

5,745 100%

AB 109 (PRCS & MSO): 5,745 69.4%

High Risk Adult (not AB 109): 2,528 31%

8,273 100%

AB109 Referrals by Service Type

Substance Abuse Services 3,112 54 %

Employment/Vocational 801 14%

Mental Health 722 13%

Cognitive Behavior Therapy 697 12%

Housing 181 3%

Other* 232 4%

5,745 100%

*Other includes: Sex Offenses, Domestic Violence, Alcohol Monitoring, Crime Prevention, Anger Management, etc.

High Risk Adult (not AB109) by Service Type

Substance Abuse Services 1,032 41%

Employment/Vocational 545 22%

DUI 171 7%

Housing 154 6%


Other* 495 20%

2,528 100%

*Other includes: Mental Health, Sex Offenses, Domestic Violence, Alcohol Monitoring, Anger Management, etc.

Total Adult Referrals by Service Type

Substance Abuse Services 4,144 51%

Employment/Vocational 1,346 16%


Mental Health 794 10%

Housing 335 4%

Other* 826 10%

8,273 100%

*Other includes: DUI, Sex Offenses, Domestic Violence, Alcohol Monitoring, Anger Management, Education, etc.

35

CORRECTIONAL PROGRAM CHECKLIST (CPC) UPDATE


35


• A well validated program evaluation tool

• Items correlated with reductions in recidivism

• Based on “what works” literature and results of over 500 evaluations and three large outcome studies

Correctional Program Checklist (CPC) (Latessa, 2015)

CPC FOCUS AREAS

37

CPC Final Report

• Overall Rating – Adherence to Evidence Based Practices

–Very High Adherence (65%+)

–High Adherence (55-64%)

–Moderate Adherence (46-54%)

– Low Adherence (45% or less)

• Report includes

– Strengths

–Areas that need improvement

–Recommendations 38

CPC Training: Jan 26-29

• University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute provided four day training

• 16 people were trained from a variety of agencies in the County of San Diego

• 20 trainers now available to assess treatment programs

CPC Adult Results

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ProgramLeadership &Development

StaffCharacteristics

Quality Assurance OffenderAssessment

TreatmentCharacteristics

Overall Capacity Overall Content Overall

Capacity Content Overall

Adult Outpatient CBT Adult Community Residential AOD Adult Outpatient AOD Adult Outpatient AOD National Average

Very High Adherence to EBP (65%+)

High Adherence to EBP (55 - 64%) Moderate Adherence to EBP (46% - 54%) Low Adherence to EBP (45% or less)

CPC Youth Results

Very High Adherence to EBP (65%+)

High Adherence to EBP (55 - 64%) Moderate Adherence to EBP (46% - 54%) Low Adherence to EBP (45% or less)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ProgramLeadership &Development

StaffCharacteristics

Quality Assurance OffenderAssessment

TreatmentCharacteristics

Overall Capacity Overall Content Overall

Capacity Content Overall

Youth Community Residential AOD Youth In Custody Residential AOD Youth Day Treatment School/MH National Average

CPC Training Participants

BHS

City Attorney

Court

District Attorney

Probation

Public Defender

Sheriff

BHS City Attorney Court District Attorney Probation Public Defender Sheriff

Benefits

• CPC gives a view into the “black box” of treatment

– Meaningful quality assurance vs. compliance

• Educational intervention

• Cost effective investment

44

TREATMENT UNIT COMMUNITY EDUCATION


44


Treatment Unit Community Education

• Through training with our providers and County partners

–Develop core competencies

–Create an ongoing forum for interaction

–Learn from the front lines of treatment

Criminogenic Needs Trainings

• Trainings focus on justice involved youth and adult offenders –Provide an overview of the RNR model

–Identify top 8 criminogenic needs and evidence based treatments that address needs

–Gather feedback from treatment providers

47 47


FEBRUARY 16, 2016


48

PUBLIC COMMENT & NON-AGENDA ITEMS

48


49 49


FEBRUARY 16, 2016


50

THANK YOU

FEBRUARY 16, 2016

50

Date post:	28-Jan-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP MEETING...2015/02/16 · Correctional Program Checklist (CPC)...

Documents