Before you run….. This version of the presentation is modified to be viewed without presenter. It’s helpful to follow the following instructions: See this at the end of most slide, this icon links back to the main slide. Click it when you see it. See this in the main slide, this icon links to the slide detailing that step. Click it when you see it. If you don’t see the two above icons, use “  ” (enter) key or “  ” (right arrow) key to navigate the presentation

The Sentencing Guidelines Commission promotes accountability and equity in adult and juvenile sentencing, provides accurate and timely information about sentencing, and recommends improvements in the criminal justice system. According to statue, Superior Court Criminal Rule 7.2 and Juvenile Court Rule 7.12, the clerk of the courts or the juvenile court forwards copies of all judgment and sentence forms and every disposition order, adjudication or deferred adjudication, to the Commission. When sentences depart from the standard sentence range or when the juvenile court imposes a sentence based upon a finding of manifest injustice, courts also submit written findings of fact and conclusions of law to the Commission. The Commission in Olympia currently receives the judgment and sentence forms in three different ways: paper copies sent through post office, electronic copies sent through , and by accessing to King county’s website. In average, the Commission received and enter approximately 29K adult felony judgment and sentence forms and 12K juvenile dispositions from all 39 counties. The forms average between five to ten pages in length, depending the inclusion of findings and conclusions. Forms vary from counties to counties. The Commission staff pre-process the forms by opening the mail, stamping receiving date, identifying judges before entering into the database. The Commission is required to conduct ongoing research aimed at sentencing practices relating to the improvement of the adult criminal and the juvenile justice systems. Based on available information, the Commission is also obliged to submit biennial reports to the legislature and the governor covering racial disproportionality in juvenile and adult sentencing; the capacity of state and local juvenile and adult facilities and resources; and recidivism information on adult and juvenile offenders. …

WASHINGTON STATE SENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION HOW WE COLLECT, CHECK, PROCESS, AND USE SENTENCING DATA Duc Luu March 14, 2008 Revisit March 13, 2009

Paper copies Electronic copies Website (King co.) 39 counties CHECK New laws implemented Business logic improved ENTER Pre-process Not OK Send letter to judges, PA, DA for sentence clarification RAW SGC DATA OK SCAN & BACK-UP not OK Request missing J&S or Dispositions Not OK MATCH AOC DATA REQUESTS FISCAL NOTES Pre-process SGC DATA Annual REPORTS “BIG” SGC DATA 1986, 1987, 1988… 2008 β - REPORT OK COLLECT WSP DATA AOC DATA DOC DATA RESEARCH PROJECTS FREEZE OK CLEAN not OK

IMPROVEMENT IN PROCESS Research team on mission Improved pre-process procedures Data entry protocols 4-layer quality assurance: More data checking & cleaning queries added (60+) Expedite communication for sentence clarification Beta (preliminary/trial-and-error) reports implemented Work with new programmers to redesign database Set up first step in data sharing with DOC, WSP, AOC Accomplished 150+

SGC: Small but Critical only Among criminal justice agencies, only the Sentencing Guidelines Commission collects and maintains sentencing data (both jail and prison) which is used to: Evaluate and monitor adult and juvenile sentencing policies and practices Recommend modifications to the Governor and the legislature on adult and juvenile sentencing Provide critical un-biased prison and jail bed impact prediction SGC: Small but Critical to Sentencing One example…..

SGC: Small but Critical to Sentencing SGC’s Data DOC’s data + SGC Fiscal Notes CTEDAOC AGODOC OFM

QUESTIONS & SUGGESTIONS Duc Luu, Data Program Manager, (360)

Annual –Statistical Summary of Adult Felony Sentencing –Juvenile Disposition Summary –Adult Judicial Sentencing Practices –Persistent Offender Sentencing –Adult Sentencing Guidelines Manual –Juvenile Disposition Manual Biennial –Recidivism of Adult Felony Offenders –Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders –Disparity & Disproportionality in Adult Felony Sentencing –Disparity & Disproportionality in Juvenile Sentencing. REPORTS

Race disproportionality: too many J&S forms without race or gender? Check current fiscal year data against prior year one: some significant discrepancies? Any mitigated exceptional sentence with aggravated reasons? Or vice versa Review 2 strikers or 3 strikers sentences Offenders’ eligibility for SSOSA, DOSA, first-time offender waiver Etc. β (preliminary) REPORTS

SGC Commission members Legislature Governor Other federal/state agencies Research institutions, criminal justice organizations Public. REQUESTS In order of priority:

If sentenced outside of standard range/grid, is it an exceptional sentence? If exceptional, missing reason? Missing required data (missing a page of J&S) Invalid date of birth, too old or too young Did all persistent offenders get life sentence? Marked as FTOW with an offense in history Etc. CHECK (60+ queries)

Run the step “CHECK” again & add: Review all J&S forms when a juvenile was sentenced as an adult Review all legitimate J&S forms that the entry program did not accept due to lack of program support. Were violation of chapter sentenced using the drug grid? Any multiple-offense J&S with sentence based on secondary offense instead of primary offense? Any qualifying sex offender was not sentenced as a non- persistent sex offenders? Review all life and death sentences for eligibility Etc. CLEAN (60+ queries)

Provide un-biased prison/jail bed impact prediction Meet with fiscal note technical workgroup to discuss assumptions to be used for the upcoming session Get raw historical data from DOC Create hypothetical dataset based on the assumptions Compute additional useful data ready for fiscal notes (prison discount, phase-in factors) Apply “convergent validity” to all data Prepare commonly used fiscal note narrative templates. FISCAL NOTES

Commission Federal Inter-agency projects Legislature Provide SGC data to others for their own research. RESEARCH PROJECTS

The majority of counties now transfers J&S and juvenile dispositions electronically. Compared with regular mail: –Faster (immediately vs. 3-4 days) –Secure (Less loss than in regular mail, backed-up on server) –Increase efficient use of time and equipment –Annual savings (mailing and paper cost): Counties: $10,500 (Juvenile) + $32,400 (Adult) = $42,900 SGC : $ 7,800 (Juvenile) + $15,200 (Adult) = $23,000 –Allow data entry staff to have more time for quality assurance. J & S and disposition submission

Data available sooner for quality assurance Tracking counties submission pattern through years to alert staff sooner to missing data or anomalies to counties. Turn Around Time (from receiving date to entering date)

Accurate data available sooner for testing Quick & higher ratio of responses from sentencing participants Clarify Sentence (…) (from the date J&S entered to the date letter sent to counties)

Accurate data available sooner for testing Quick & higher ratio of responses from sentencing participants. Clarify Sentence (cont.)

Retrieve old verified data to fill missing current ones Data Element Completion Borrow data from WSP, DOC, AOC SGC WSP AOC DOC SGC Record 101 SGC Record 907 Record 101 Record 907

Data Element Completion (cont. 1) WSP AOC Use WSP, DOC, AOC to verify SGC data DOC SGC 98% SGC 2%

Data Element Completion (cont. 2) Percentage of data completion