0. Evidence-Based Decision Making in Sentencing: Yamhill County’s Early Defendant Analysis (EDA) Process Oregon Justice Reinvestment Summit April 6 , Presented by: John Collins, Presiding Judge, Yamhill County Circuit Court Brad Berry, District Attorney, Yamhill County Carol Fredrick, Defense Attorney, Yamhill County Ted Smietana, Director, Yamhill County Department of Community Justice Brian Rucker, Corrections Manager, Yamhill County Department of Community Justice

1. Yamhill County: Evidence-Based Decision Making (EBDM)
National Institute of Corrections selects Yamhill County to implement evidence-based decision making in its local criminal justice system.
Yamhill sets up an EBDM collaborative policy team:
County Commissioners
Judiciary
Victim Services
Prosecution
Defense
Sheriff-Jail
Behavioral and Mental Health
Community Corrections
Community members
Information & Technology

2. Policy team agrees to use four principles:
Professional judgment is enhanced when informed by evidence-based knowledge.
Every point in the system is an opportunity for harm reduction.
Systems have better outcomes when they operate collaboratively.
Systems learn and improve when they base decisions on the collection, analysis, and use of data and information.

3. Policy team targets four areas:
Special Needs
Pretrial Justice
Community Corrections Cognitive Programs
Sentencing

4. Sentencing
2012 – Policy team developed an assessment process to help judges make evidence-based decisions about conditions of probation.
- After HB 3194 & Justice Reinvestment the team modified our assessment process in order to provide prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges with risk and needs information to identify non-violent presumptive prison cases who can be safely managed in the community.
(excludes person and sex offense cases)

5. Sentencing Process
1. Non-violent and presumptive prison charges are referred to probation officer for assessment after arraignment.
2. Officer uses scientifically validated instruments to assess:
Mental health
Criminogenic risk and needs (recidivism risk)
Motivation for change & treatment
Can the person be safely managed in the community…or NOT.
Overall, these presumptive prison cases are high risk and high need, but there are significant differences in risk and need for each case

6. Three Sample Cases: Different Risk to the Community
very high
high
medium
low
very low

7. Yamhill County

8. Yamhill County

9. Key Findings Continued
Defendants report higher levels of satisfaction with the process – increased sense of “procedural justice”
In the first 16 months, the sentencing process saved a total of 673 prison months
This compares to 65 months saved with transitional leave.
The Justice Reinvestment goal for Yamhill was a 6% reduction in prison use, the actual reduction was 11%.
Yamhill County’s average length of stay in prison has dropped.

10. Key Findings in First 16 Months
101 referrals (58 sentenced to date):
Recommended prison for 20 people (34%)
Recommended community supervision for 38 people (66%)
Court followed the EDA recommendation in 78% of the cases
Judges, prosecutors and defense need training and coaching to fully make use of the EDA report
25 defendants received a downward dispositional departure to probation
3 probation failures; all technical violations
18 defendants received a downward durational departure (prison sentences)

11. Next Steps
Consider using assessment process to inform conditions of supervision for presumptive probation cases.
Consider using EDA process for all prison bound defendants.
Develop EDA data system for continued state and local data collection and analysis.
JRP proposal likely will include funds for a dedicated assessment officer, and data analysis capacity.