1. Presentation on the Phase 2 Report on the Community Corrections Division Orange County, Florida December 17, 2013

2. Phase 2 Scope of Work  Evaluate Community Corrections Division services relating to:  Review of the organizational structure and supervisory oversight of the each of the units in the Division.  Analyze and assess staffing levels and caseloads in each unit.  Assess and analyze the use of technology.  Evaluate the feasibility of privatization.  Analysis of the potential of discontinuing programs and services. Pre-Trial ReleaseProbation Pre-Trial DiversionWork Release Alternative Community ServiceCentral Intake

3. Project Methodologies  Interviewed Community Corrections and justice system stakeholders to understand the use and issues with the programs.  Collected program trend data for assignments in each program.  Developed a detailed database of assignments to each CCD program in 2012.  Conducted a survey of similar programs in Florida and elsewhere to compare features which could be utilized in Orange County.  Analyzed the program and opportunities for improvement.  Throughout the study process met with the County and Community Corrections to discuss facts, issues and alternatives.

4. Pre-Trial Release  Consistent with Phase 1 recommendations, reconvene the Public Safety Coordinating Committee to develop program guidelines about use and levels of supervision.  Also consistent with Phase 1, utilize electronic monitoring as a tool in the supervision of higher risk offenders.  The Chief Judge should work with judges to make the use of PTR more consistent.  Utilize the PSCC to monitor the effectiveness of pre-trial release in the County.  Consider moderating the use of ‘zero tolerance’ in release supervision.  Review the bail schedule.

5. Pre-Trial Diversion  Work with the State Attorney’s Office to make decisions regarding the waiving fees more consistent.  Establish a foundation for the allocation of ‘voluntary donations’ to a wider array of community not-for-profit agencies.  With and through the State Attorney and the PSCC revisit the desirability of Tier 1 and Tier 2 programs.  The ability of CCD staff to obtain participant information should be facilitated.  Consider transferring responsibility for this program from CCD to the State Attorney’s Office.

6. Probation  Develop caseload standards and adjust them based on case specialization and uniqueness.  Without waiting for the implementation of a new case management system, take steps to reduce paper case files in Probation and between Probation and other CCD programs.

7. Alternative Community Service  This program should be restructured to get Community Corrections Officers in the field and give case file responsibility to Corrections Aides.  The number of work sites should be reduced by at least 20% to focus CCOs on fewer sites.  Take steps to make more consistent approaches to supervision and fees.  ACS and other CCD programs need to work more closely on coordinating services.  The withdrawal of State assignments will have a dramatic affect on the program and its overall success.

8. Work Release  Work Release has established itself as an effective program in providing job search and life skill enhancement training to participants in the program. These skills should be provided to other CCD programs.  Additional programs and services should be added, especially during “non-business hours”.  Work Release needs to develop improved performance metrics to aid decision making in the future.  Because both the Detention Center and Work Release Center inmate populations are down, the County should explore bringing WR inmates into a disused Detention Center pod.

9. Central Intake  Continue to utilize the ORAS risk assessment tool but monitor system refinements and continue to adapt it to local use.  As part of that adaptation, continue to allow discretion at intake but take steps to define “bands of discretion”.  Continue to take steps to reduce paper file processes, even in advance of the implementation of the new case management system.

10. Major Conclusion from this Phase 2 Assessment of Community Corrections  There have been many changes in Community Corrections over the past year; this process has accelerated in the past few months.  There are several new managers in CCD with a focus on program effectiveness and risk management.  The Quality Assurance program has resulted in program compliance and performance improvement.  Policies and procedures have been completely overhauled.  The Division has, now, extensive experience with a risk assessment tool for incoming assignments.  The Division is implementing a new case management system.