1 ORANGE COUNTY SACPA/PC1210 Three-Year Report Sandy Hilger, Research Division, OC Probation Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division, OC Probation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
REPORTING VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION
Advertisements

Senate Criminal Justice Committee October 7, 2009 Walter A. McNeil, Secretary Florida Department of Corrections.
AB 109 Public Safety Realignment December 5, 2013.
Department of Corrections Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission “Prison Bound Offenders” Appropriations Act Item 387 D September 8, 2008.
Oklahoma Department of Corrections DUI Offender Profile
DUI AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY ART LUSSE JUNE 30, 2010 LAW & JUSTICE INTERIM COMMITTEE.
Residential Community Supervision Programs
Measuring 109 In Fresno County
Conducting Research in Challenging Times: California Parolee Reentry Court Evaluation Association of Criminal Justice Research, California March
1 17-Year-Old Offenders in the Adult Criminal Justice System Legislative Audit Bureau April 2008.
Douglas B. Marlowe, J.D., Ph.D. Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania TRI science addiction Effective Strategies for Drug-Abusing.
Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative (DOSA): Treatment and Supervision
Public Safety Realignment Local custody for non-violent, non- serious, non-sex offenders Changes to State Parole Local Post-release Supervision Local.
THE IMPACT OF AB 109 ON LAPD. Overview AB 109 impact on the LAPD Statistical information AB 109 impact on LAPD jail facilities Securing the safety of.
ICAOS Jail Administrator Presentation Presented by: [Revision 3/1/2014]
Community Supervision and Alternative Sanctions Comparisons Barb Tombs July 16, 2007 Presentation to the CT Sentencing Task Force Subcommittees.
ICAOS Jail Administrator Presentation Presented by: [Revision 5/18/2012]
Chapter 13 Parole Conditions and Revocation. Introduction Parole conditions determine the amount of freedom versus restriction a parolee has Accomplishment.
1 Division of Adult Parole Operations MARGARITA PEREZ Deputy Director Enhancing Public Safety through the Successful Reintegration of Offenders.
Implementing Evidence Based Principles into Supervision March 20,2013 Mack Jenkins, Chief Probation Officer County of San Diego.
Elmore County Drug and DUI Court
Reporting Requirements for School Staff Presented by Nancy Hungerford November 30, 2011 Presented by Nancy Hungerford November 30, 2011.
Lost Opportunities: The Reality of Latinos in the U.S. Criminal Justice System Nancy E. Walker J. Michael Senger Francisco A. Villarruel Angela M. Arboleda.
Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 (AB109) Impacts on San Francisco County Wendy S. Still Chief Adult Probation Officer Association for Criminal Justice.
 Which crimes were changed and how will those changes impact the State Courts?  How does the emphasis on the Accountability Courts movement affect prosecutors?
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 2011 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PLAN AUGUST 30, 2011.
The Rhode Island Experience Ellen Evans Alexander Assistant Director RI Department of Corrections.
Making Communities Safer Population Management/Control Strategies ASCA All Directors Training Session 2 December 3, 2010 CHRISTOPHER B. EPPS COMMISSIONER.
Probation and Parole in the United States Your presenter:
November 5, 2014 New Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instruments – Status Update VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Juvenile Crime Prevention Evaluation Phase 2 Interim Report Findings in Brief Juvenile Crime Prevention Evaluation Phase 2 Interim Report Findings in Brief.
© 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill Chapter 5 Intermediate Sanctions: Between Probation and Incarceration 1.
Pretrial, Probation and Parole
NC Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission RECIDIVISM OF 16 AND 17 YEAR OLD AND JUVENILE OFFENDERS: FINDINGS FROM TWO STUDIES Presented to Youth Accountability.
UCLA’s Statewide Evaluation of Proposition 36 Darren Urada, Ph.D. UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs Association for Criminal Justice Research (California)
1 The MDOC Five Year Plan to Control Prison Growth Phase III: Long Term Policy Options SUMMARY BRIEF SUMMARY BRIEF Preliminary MDOC Proposal Revising Michigan’s.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION 2010 Board of Parole Hearings Revocation Trends.
TREATMENT COURTS Inns of Court Presentation By John Markson & Elliott Levine October 17, 2012.
North Carolina TASC NC TASC Bridging Systems for Effective Offender Care Management.
Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Association for Criminal Justice Research (California) 76th Semi-Annual.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTRO TO CORRECTIONS. WHAT IS CORRECTIONS? Corrections is that portion of the criminal justice system charged with carrying out the sentences.
OFFENDER REENTRY: A PUBLIC SAFETY STRATEGY Court Support Services Division.
1 Evaluating the Orange County School Mobile Assessment and Response Team (SMART) Association for Criminal Justice Research, California 63rd Semi-Annual.
Implementing SACPA: Orange County’s Experience October 16, 2008 ACJR Semi-annual Conference Christie Gardiner, Ph.D. California State University, Fullerton.
Public Safety and Offender Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007 (AB 900) Implementation and Impact on County Mental Health Robin Dezember Chief Deputy Secretary.
Realignment: A One-year Examination of Offenders Released from State Prison in the First Six Months of Public Safety Realignment Association for Criminal.
Immediate Sanction Probation Pilot Project Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission June 8, 2015.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Corrections Chapter Twelve Reading
Legal Consequences Illegal Drug Possession And Underage Drinking Presented by Mrs. Noël.
Connecticut Department of Correction Division of Parole and Community Services Special Management Unit Parole Manager Frank Mirto October 14, 2015.
Yavapai County Jail Planning Services Presentation to: Yavapai County Board of Supervisors January 6, 2016.
ADULT REDEPLOY ILLINOIS Mary Ann Dyar, Program Administrator National Association of Sentencing Commissions August 7, 2012.
Kathryn P. Jett Director California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs.
Slide 1 Examining Kansas SB 123: Mandatory Probation and Treatment Don Stemen, Loyola University Chicago The Honorable Richard Smith, Kansas Sentencing.
Oregon Youth Authority Meeting the Challenge through Collaboration and Partnerships Oregon´s juvenile justice system is composed of a network of local.
Yolo County AB 109 Realignment Public Planning Davis April 8 th, 2014 Yolo County Board of Supervisors And Community Corrections Partnership.
Senate Bill 64 Omnibus Crime/Corrections Bill To improve public safety, slow the growth of Alaska’s prison population, and save money. 1.
Probation and Community Justice Program Overview
FY17: Briefing on Jail Bed Contingency Funds
Summit County Probation Services
Sentencing Reform in CA
10 Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections.
sealing of adult convictions
Chapter 8 Parole: Early Release and Reentry
Overview of the Juvenile Justice System
Criminal Court Cases Chapter 16, Section 2.
Juvenile Offenders Delinquent acts and unruly acts are legal terms for behavior in minors under the age of 16. Delinquent behavior is an act committed.
10 Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections.
Substance abuse & criminal charges {Bridges Not Barriers}
Presentation transcript:

1 ORANGE COUNTY SACPA/PC1210 Three-Year Report Sandy Hilger, Research Division, OC Probation Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division, OC Probation Alaka Nafday and Curt Condon Quality Management, OC HCA Mary Hale, Division Manager, OC HCA-ADAS COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE AGENCY ORANGE COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT

2 Legal Issues   SACPA applies to 3 categories of defendants: New Offenders, Probationers, and Parolees.   Applies to anyone convicted of a non-violent drug possession offense on or after   Applies to anyone on probation for a non-violent drug possession offense or on after , who violates that probation by getting arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense.   Parolees who are on parole on who violate parole by getting arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense.

3 Legal Issues A non-violent drug possession offense is: 1. unlawful possession, or 2. use, or 3. “transportation for personal use” of any substance listed on California’s five controlled substance schedules. PC1210 (a) NVDP also applies to being under the influence of any controlled substance in violation of H&S

4 Legal Issues  The term “Non-Violent Drug Possession Offense” does not include: 11. Possession for sale or 22. Production or 33. Manufacture of any Controlled Substance

5 Legal Issues   Defendants are ineligible for SACPA if previously convicted of 1 or more serious or violent felonies (strikes), and if within the last 5 years they: 1a. were in prison, or 2b. were convicted of a felony other than a non- violent drug possession offense, or 3b. were convicted of a misdemeanor involving physical injury or the threat of physical injury to another person.

6 Legal Issues   Defendants are ineligible if while using a firearm they either possess or were under the influence of Cocaine, Heroine, Methamphetamine, or PCP.   Defendant is ineligible if he/she refused drug treatment as a condition of probation.   Defendant is ineligible if convicted in the same proceeding of a misdemeanor or felony unrelated to the use of drugs.

7 Legal Issues   If the defendant qualifies and accepts drug treatment under SACPA, sentencing will include: 11. mandatory probation 32. mandatory participation in a licensed or certified treatment program (maximum 12 months with 6 months of aftercare) Sentencing will not include incarceration as a condition of probation

8 Legal Issues SACPA splits probation violations into 2 categories, drug related and non-drug related:   On Non-drug related violations, the court may revoke probation.   On the first and second drug related violations, rather than revoking probation, the court may intensify treatment.   On the third drug-related violation, or if the defendant is found to present a threat to community safety, then the court may revoke probation.

9 Legal Issues   The defendant may petition for dismissal of the charges at any time after the completing drug treatment.   Unlike Drug Court, if the defendant is successful at the hearing, the court shall dismiss the indictment and the arrest shall be deemed “to have never occurred.”

10 Legal Issues In order to grant a dismissal, the court must find:   the defendant has substantially complied with the conditions of probation, and   the defendant has completed a prescribed course of drug treatment, and   that as a result of that treatment there is “reasonable cause” to believe the defendant “will not abuse controlled substances in the future”.

11 Background   PC1210/SACPA became effective on July 1,   Primary intent: to provide drug treatment rather than incarceration to eligible non- violent adult drug offenders   Goals: preserve jail and prison cells for serious and violent offenders enhance public safety by reducing drug- related crimes improve public health by reducing drug abuse

12 Background Background The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act has had a dramatic affect on County resources. In terms of the Orange County Probation Department alone: b Over 11,000 offenders had entered probation on PC1210 by July 2004 b By July 2004, 45% of adults on probation were past or current participants in PC1210

13 Evaluating the results We examined the results, three years after implementation, for 3863 offenders who agreed to participate in SACPA during the first year (July June 2002).

14 Questions: 1. What is the status of the 3863 participants three years later? 2. How well, or poorly, did the offenders move through the system? Where did offenders fall out of the system? 3. Did SACPA probationers present a threat to the community? ( criminal history background and recidivism while on Probation) 4. Were SACPA probationers amenable to probation and treatment services. Did they show progress in terms of rehabilitation and improvement of life competencies?

15 Where are they three years later?

16 Where did we lose them?

17 Offense profile of PC1210 probationers Initial sustained offense:

18 Violations during term of probation   Probationers who entered Probation due to a PC1210 offense had fewer new law violations than the average adult probationer. 24% had one or more new law violations versus 31% of non-PC1210 probationers.   Among the terminating SACPA probationers from the first year group, 54% of new law violations were misdemeanors 85% of new law violations were drug-related

19 Do PC1210 offenders respond to services? Probation assessments of risk and need factors at probation entry and exit indicated improvements in almost all areas. Areas of significant improvement included: * drug addiction, and alcohol addiction, * vocational ability, employment, * companions, and physical health, * overall risk of recidivism * overall needs score

20 Treatment completion rates:   The treatment completion rate for the first group (24%) was the same as the average for SACPA participants across the State.   In comparison to the State, OC “lost” more offenders before entering treatment, but kept more offenders once they entered treatment.

21 In summary:   The majority of those who fell out of SACPA continued to be held accountable within the criminal justice system.   All SACPA probationers showed significant gains in competency except for those who terminated from Probation and went to prison.

22 Did we meet the SACPA goals?   Rate of incarceration for California in comparison to the national rate: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bulletins “Prisoners in 1994” through “Prisoners in 2003”,

23 Did we meet the SACPA goals?   Preserving jail and prison beds  The rate of prison incarceration for low level drug offenses: (CDC Data) Garrick Percival, UC Riverside, based on CDC data.

24 Did we meet the SACPA goals?   Reducing Drug Related Crime 76% of year-one participants had no new law violations while on Probation. Needs/Risk assessment scores from start to finish of Probation showed a significant reduction in risk of recidivism as well as a significant reduction in drug abuse

25 Did we meet the SACPA goals?   Improving public health - first year group 59% (2259) enrolled in treatment  24% (924) completed treatment (approximately 200 of these completed residential)  Probation NIC assessments indicated a significant improvement in drug addiction, vocational ability, employment, companions, and physical health

26 HCA Modifications after the first year   Treatment assessments were conducted by providers rather than HCA (2003 to present)   Increased flexibility is given to providers to augment treatment with additional services (2003 to the present)   Intensification of Outpatient I and II (2003 to the present)   Funding cuts forced the reduction of the highest level of outpatient treatment and of residential treatment in 2003   Increase in residential treatment (2004 to present)

27 HCA Modifications after the first year   Co-location of HCA assessment staff with Probation staff.   More intensive probation supervision of higher risk cases made possible by: Creation of field monitored (banked) caseloads for lower risk cases (2003) Elimination of most new misdemeanor cases from formal probation (9/1/2004) Petitioning the court for relief of supervision immediately upon completion of treatment   Increased supervision activities as evidenced by over 264% increase in the number of home-calls and searches.

28 Future Plans   Identify and implement preventative measures to reduce the number of individuals who go out to warrant.   Work more closely with local law enforcement to address the issue of individuals once they go out to warrant.   Focus upon the issue of improving employment rates for SACPA probationers.   Conduct workload time study of PC1210 units in order to ensure the most efficient and effective use of Probation resources.

29 Sources of Information   Goals of SACPA: Official SACPA web-site at:   UCLA state evaluation: “Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, 2003 Report”, Doug Longshore, et. al. UCLA   Incarceration Rates for Drug Offenses: “The Influence of Local Contextual Characteristics on the Implementation of a Statewide Voter Initiative…, Percival, Garrick, Policy Studies Journal; 2004, Vol. 32 Issue 4, p589. (UC Riverside) (Data shared during communications with the author).   Treatment Information: Orange County Probation PC1210 Shared Database System.   Violation Data while on Probation: Orange County probation department NIC Risk/Needs Assessment database and Case Management System database.

30 Sources of Information   Successful Case Dismissals: Orange County Probation Case Management System data verified with Orange County Public Defender data.   Prison Incarcerations of First-Year PC1210 Participants: Orange County NIC Risk/Needs data verified against case information from the Orange County District Attorney Office and Superior Court.   Improvements in Probationers’ Competency Levels: Orange County NIC Risk/Needs assessment data as entered by the deputy probation officers.   Offense Rates while on Probation: Orange County Probation Business Plan   Criminal History Profiles and Offenses while on Probation: Data from Orange County Probation Case Management System and NIC Risk/Needs Databases.

31 Contacts Orange County Probation Department: Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division (714) Sandy Hilger, Research Analyst, Research Division (714) Orange County Health Care Agency: Mary Hale, Mary Hale, Division Manager, OC HCA-ADAS ( 714) Alaka Nafday, Quality Management, OC HCA (714)