1. Santa Barbara County Re-Alignment Strategy Study
James Austin
Karl Becker
Robin Allen
David Bates
Gerald Cooper
Robert Harris

2. Tasks to Be Completed
Task 2: Review the current Realignment plan and the appropriateness of the funded programs and their alignment with the overall goals established by the CCP.
Task 3: Compare the language and intent of the original AB 109 legislation, in particular the “justice reinvestment” emphasis, with the SBC realignment initiatives and programs/services which have been funded over the past five years.
Task 4: Assess whether the services and programs funded through AB 109 have been delivered as anticipated and whether they are being adequately monitored.
Task 5: Perform a “gap analysis” in the services/programming and identify opportunities and practices.
Task 6: Make recommendations regarding how the cost-benefit analysis provided under the “Results First” Initiative could be further incorporated into the local plan to ensure evidence-based strategies with the goal of increasing public safety while holding offenders accountable, in community based programs and while in custody are the highest priority.

3. Tasks to Be Completed
Task 7: Compare the funding distribution and program selection to other counties and examining other realignment plans to identify new strategies, particularly in the area of “justice reinvestment”
Task 8: Organize community forums or other avenues of engaging the community in the planning process.
Task 9: Utilize “Results First” cost benefit-analysis to compare in-custody as well as community programming options
Task 10: Consider the implications of Proposition 47 and potential programming strategies that could mitigate some of its impacts.
Task 11: Review information flow between and data gathering among departments (Probation, Sheriff, District Attorney, Public Defender, Courts) and make recommendations for improvement.

6. Crime and Arrest Comparisons

7. Corrections

8. Changes on Santa Barbara County Correctional Populations 2011- 2015

11. Current AB 109 Population

12. AB 109 Current Inmates

13. AB 109 Current Inmates

14. Key AB 109 Attributes COMPAS PRCS PSS Low 32 12% 36 20% Medium 56 22%33
18%
High
148
57%
114
62%
Average Age
41 years
37 years
Time Served
480 days
630 days

15. Agencies Delivering Services

16. Services

17. Experimental Design
Random Assignment into Experimental and Control Groups
Replicated in Several Jurisdictions
Can Be Expanded to Large Proportions of the correctional populations

18. Experimental Design Group Time 1 Program Time 2 Recidivism
25%
Control
40%

19. Quasi-Experimental Design
Non-Random Assignment
Matched Groups
Cannot Control For Motivation/Self-Selection
Time Series Design
Comparative Jurisdictions Preferred
Difficult to Control for External Factors
Yet very useful to measure trends

20. Kiosk NYC

21. Impact of EM on Sex Offenders in Florida
Measure
No EM RF
GPS
Tech Violation
30.8%
8.9%
3.8%
New Offense
11.0%
2.1%
1.1%
Abscond
15.9%
8.6%
6.1%

22. Relative Rate vs. Absolute Rate Reductions
“We analyzed the findings from 25 well-researched cognitive-behavioral treatment programs for general adult offenders. We found that, on average, these programs can be expected to reduce recidivism rates by 8.2 %.
That is, without a cognitive-behavioral program we expect that about 49% or these offenders will recidivate with a new felony conviction after an eight-year follow-up. With a cognitive –behavioral treatment program, we expect the recidivism probability to drop four points to 45% - an 8.2% reduction in recidivism rates.” Aos et al., 2006.

23. Number Needed to Treat (NNT)
The number needed to treat (NNT) is a measure used in communicating the effectiveness of a program intervention The NNT is the average number of people who need to be treated to prevent one additional negative outcome (e.g. the number of people that need to be treated for one to benefit compared with a control in a clinical trial). It is defined as the inverse of the absolute risk reduction. The ideal NNT is 1, where everyone improves with treatment and no one improves with control. The higher the NNT, the less effective is the treatment.

27. Impact of Treatment

28. Reasoning and Rehabilitation Estimates

29. Armstrong Study Conclusion

30. Armstrong Findings

31. Armstrong Findings - Continued

32. Supervision Strategies
Length of supervision (LOS) is not related to recidivism
Community supervision has been shown in several evaluations to not be related to recidivism
Need to create methods for reducing LOS and conditions based on compliance
Proven supervision strategies
Kiosk – strongest
Electronic Monitoring – some impact
No office contacts for low risk people
No incarceration for pure technical violations

33. Initial Findings and Recommendations
Very comprehensive and well reasoned strategic plan.
Funds are more than sufficient to meet demands of AB109 population.
Need to expand current Sheriff Treatment Program
More comprehensive
Award good behavior with Milestone credits
Better transition from jail to community supervision
Need to consolidate contracting of community services for better efficiencies and accounting.
Need to increase by some number the number of residential beds (mental health and basic support).
Increase placement to other counties – conduct research on this
Reduce the level of investment in cognitive type treatment programs and put more resources into basic support services (food, shelter, transportation, employment).
Increase victim compensation funds.

34. Key “Gap” Questions
Number of AB109 inmates leaving the jail in need of short-term (30-60 days) residential treatment.
Number of AB109 inmates in the jail with sentences of “release upon placement in residential program”
Number of AB109 offenders (PSS and PRCS) in the community in need of residential mental health placement.