Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections

Transcription

1 Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections William R. Steinhaus County Executive Mary Ellen Still Director of Probation William A. Fluck Deputy Director Catherine A. Lane Deputy Director

2 It is with great pleasure that I submit the 2005 Annual Report for the Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections. Highlights for 2005 include: Training of a second probation officer in the G.R.E.A.T. (Gang Resistance Education and Training) curriculum, which is designed to help students reject the lure of gangs and other negative influences. Preparation began for the opening of the new Family Drug Treatment Court for juveniles. Team members, including a probation officer, were trained in this model designed to address substance abuse by youth involved in the juvenile justice system. A probation officer was trained in Pathways to Employment, a project funded by the National Institute of Corrections, to promote employment among probationers. This is a comprehensive approach to target employment issues, a known risk factor contributing to recidivism. Probation Officers performed their jobs admirably in supervising over 2,000 individuals placed under supervision. They also prepared pre-sentence reports for courts, collected restitution for crime victims, served as court liaisons and contributed to the community through their involvement with various charitable and public service organizations and endeavors. In order to achieve its goals, the department recognizes and gratefully acknowledges the support of County Executive William R. Steinhaus as well as the Dutchess County Legislature.

3 Message from the Director Mission Statement Organizational Chart Administration Family Court Intake/Predisposition Unit Family Court Investigation and Supervision Unit Pretrial Services Unit Electronic Monitoring/Warrant Unit Presentence Investigation Unit Adult Supervision Units Special Services Unit Financial Unit Support Services Unit Staff Development Employee Recognition

4 MISSION STATEMENT The Mission of the Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections is to protect the community through intervention in the lives of those under supervision by facilitating compliance with court orders and serving as a catalyst for positive change. We operate in collaboration with our criminal justice partners and the community. We provide services to courts, help strengthen families and give victims a voice in the justice system. We provide leadership and services in a cost effective community based setting.

5 PROBATION AND COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS. Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Southern Dutchess Unit Poughkeepsie/ Northern Dutchess Unit Family Court Investigation& Supervision Unit Family Court Pre Disposition Unit Investigation Unit Financial Unit Electronic Monitoring Unit Special Services Unit Support Services Unit Pre-Trial Unit Organizational Chart

6 Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections County Executive William R. Steinhaus Director Mary Ellen Still Deputy Director William A. Fluck Deputy Director Catherine A. Lane Units Unit Administrators Family Court Supervision Barbara Schumacher Family Court Diversion Dominick Ignaffo Pretrial Services Jonathan Heller Electronic Monitoring John Kryzak Investigations Joanne Nellis Northern Dutchess Supervision Karen O Connor Southern Dutchess Supervision Jane Salese Special Services Sandra Ackert Financial Sharon Harrison Support Services Peggy Milone Dutchess County Legislature Public Safety Committee David Kelly, Chairman Robert Rolison, Vice Chairman Robert Clearwater Gerry Hutchings Patrick Nesbitt Margaret Fettes William McCabe

7 Dominick P. Ignaffo, Unit Administrator Karen DeSimone, Senior Probation Officer Family Court Unit Intake/Predisposition Intake Function Appearance tickets issued to potential juvenile delinquents by police departments throughout the county are returnable to Intake. In 2005, 300 Appearance Tickets were returnable to Probation Intake. Intake also accepts complaints from parents/schools and occasionally police who allege a PINS. Persons In Need of Supervision 712(a) of The New York State Family Court Act defines a Person in Need of Supervision as a person less than eighteen years of age who does not attend school in accordance with the provisions of part one sixty-five of the Education Law or who is incorrigible, ungovernable or habitually disobedient and beyond the lawful control of a parent or other person legally responsible for such child s care, or other lawful authority, or who violates the provision of section of the New York State Penal Law which is the unlawful possession of marijuana. Juvenile Delinquent 301.2(1) of The New York State Family Court Act, defines a Juvenile Delinquent as a person over seven and less than sixteen years of age, who, having committed an act that would constitute a crime if committed by an adult. Probation Officer Esther Mutema

8 Family Court Intake assists the public by preparing various petitions necessary to access Family Court. The various petitions prepared include petitions for support, custody, visitation, paternity, guardianship and family offense petitions for those who seek Orders of Protection. A representative from Grace Smith House Inc. assists in completing family offense petitions as well as providing advocacy for domestic violence victims. In PINS complaints were received. The PINS coordinator, Karen DeSimone, receives and assigns all new cases, schedules and conducts PINS orientations, and facilitates cases through the assessment process including the scheduling of school review meetings and the review of the 30 day youth assessment screening instrument [YASI] which includes a case management plan. The YASI is effective in determining and indicating risk and protective factors. The PINS Coordinator also communicates regularly with all school districts regarding utilization of the program and coordination of individual cases. Lower risk youth who may benefit from community-based intervention are referred to the Youth Services Unit. This year a special effort was made to reach out to every school district in Dutchess County via the long distance learning center at BOCES to explain a change in the PINS law and how it affected school filings. The Collaborative Solutions Team assists in mental health screens, consultations, interventions [including crisis], safety screens, mediation, and substance abuse screening. They can be utilized as a team or individually at any stage from pre-intake to case supervision. They also assist in the administration of the V-Disc. The Voice DISC [Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children] is a comprehensive mental health assessment for 9-17 year olds. Many adolescents involved with the juvenile justice system are at high risk for mental health disorders i.e.: depression, anxiety, substance abuse and suicidal behavior. Probation Officer Steven Pizarro

9 DIVERSION SUPERVISION The Probation Officers in this unit assist the youth in complying with the case management plan. When appropriate, restorative justice tools are implemented in JD case plans in particular. If diversion does not resolve the complaint in the designated time frame the case may be referred to Family Court. The Probation Officers have made a concerted effort to reduce the number of cases sent to court for the second consecutive year. They have also effectively reduced the number of cases ultimately placed with the Department of Social Services for the past two years. PINS PLACEMENTS Several groups are held in house and administered by probation officers from the Diversion and/or Supervision Units, or the Collaborative Solutions Team. Among the groups held in 2005 were: art, anger management, cognitive life skills, drop in home work group with the assistance of Marist College students, parenting [including Parents Who Care Program], and substance abuse. A certified social worker from the Astor Clinic continues to work with our younger children [10 & under] as well as children referred for a second time to the PINS Program. The worker may do outreach to families in the home to assist them in linking to services. The certified social worker works within the Office of Probation and Community Corrections in partnership with the assigned probation officer.

10 PINS Diversion Cases Received Total R eceiv ed Adjusted Ref erred to Court marks the first time fewer than 100 cases were sent to petition. JUVENILE Delinquents Juvenile Delinquent Cases Received Cases Receiv ed Adjusted Referred to County Attorney As can be seen by the above chart, appearance tickets have dropped for the 4 th consecutive year. This year the Diversion Unit worked very hard to put more adolescents on diversion and send fewer cases to court. It is noted that the diversion unit collected approximately $12, in restitution. Respondents being supervised on diversion performed approximately 800 hours of community service. The recidivism rate for adolescent JD S while being supervised on diversion was 2.5%. The recidivism rate for the same population 6 months after diversion ended was 12.5%, extremely low for a juvenile justice population.

11 Mandatory PINS Diversion Process Parent Filed PINS Incorrigible Runaway Substance Abuse Truancy PINS Diversion Intake School Filed PINS Incorrigible Truancy PINS Diversion Assessment Family Court 3 TO 6 MONTHS PINS Diversion Supervision PINS Successful Adjustment Juvenile Delinquent Diversion Process J. D. Appearance Ticket J. D. Diversion Intake 2 to 4 Month Diversion Supervision J. D. Diversion Successful Adjustment Dutchess County Attorney Office Family Court

12 2005 Month Support PINS Paternity Guardianship Custody JD S Visitation FO s JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

13 Family Court Investigation and Supervision Barbara Schumacher, Unit Administrator Sarah Kennedy, Senior Probation Officer Diane Whiteman, Senior Probation Officer The Family Court Investigation and Supervision Unit provides probation services to children and families who have been processed through the Family Court. These services include pre-dispositional investigations for Custody, Visitation, Guardianship, Neglect, Family Offense, Persons in Need of Supervision and Juvenile Delinquency. Probation supervision is provided for youth adjudicated as Persons in Need of Supervision and Juvenile Delinquents, as well as for youth who received Supervised Adjournments in Contemplation of Dismissal on Juvenile Delinquent and Person in Need of Supervision petitions. Investigations Three officers in the Family Court Unit prepare seven different types of investigations that are used in the Juvenile Justice System for a variety of reasons. The investigations are used by the Family Court, County Attorney s Office, Department of Social Services, Office of Children and Family Services, therapists and supervising Probation Officers. Most of the investigations are used to assist the Family Court in making sentencing decisions for children and youth. The investigations include legal, social, educational, criminal, substance abuse and mental health histories of those involved and include an evaluation and recommendation. In addition, they help to assess risk and protective factors of the youth that come before the court for sentencing. Investigation requests by Family Court decreased by 9% this year. This is the second year in a row that they have decreased. Most notably, PINS investigation requests were lower for the third consecutive year. It appears that attempts to divert low risk PINS cases from Family Court, with the use of the YASI (Youth Assessment Screening Instrument) have continued to be successful. The investigation requests from Family Court for Juvenile Delinquent cases remained almost constant after following a 14% increase in Custody, Visitation and Guardianship investigation requests have again increased, this year by 8%.

14 40 ALL FAMILY COURT INVESTIGATIONS RECEIVED Count of Clients / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /2005 Month Case Received 10/ / /2005 Supervision The mission of the Family Court Unit as it applies to supervision is to prevent youth from becoming further involved in the juvenile justice system and to prevent their progress into the adult criminal justice system while protecting the community. Four Probation Officers and two Senior Probation Officers were supervising approximately 214 youths at the close of This is an increase from 170 at the end of In addition to assessing risk and protective factors, the officers monitor behavior at home and at school and intervene as appropriate to address the identified needs. The Probation Officers offer opportunities for youth increase the protective factors in their lives by establishing groups in education, leisure activities, parenting, anger management and social skills. These groups are offered at our office and continue to be very successful. We continue to have a Probation Officer II, located at the BOCES BETA site, who works with youth on both diversion and supervision. Also, Probation Officers directly linked youth with community service opportunities, employment programs, parenting classes, school counseling, treatment for substance abuse, mental health and sex offender issues in addition to other appropriate services. The Mental Health Juvenile Justice grant is in its fourth year and has become an integral part of the Juvenile Delinquent service plan. It provides two Astor clinicians who are housed at Probation and team with the Probation Officers to provide a variety of services to probationers, families and staff. It also funds staff training opportunities at probation on a regular basis. The MHJJ grant has continued to be effective by providing family focused treatment, on site, to youths and their families who have mental health and substance abuse issues. A youth employment component was added to that program in Probation and Astor staff also worked closely on Juvenile Sex Offender cases, meeting biweekly, with the site alternated between Probation and Astor. The Unit Administrator has also met with administrators from Astor and Lexington Center for Recovery to facilitate increased responsiveness to substance abuse treatment needs.

15 What was previously seen as a relative pattern of decrease in PINS supervision and increase in Juvenile Delinquency supervision cases did not occur in The relationship in caseload types (JD, PINS, ACDJD, ACDPINS) remained consistent from 2004 to 2005 while total cases received were reduced by approximately 5%. 40 JUVENILE SUPERVISION Cases Received 2005 Count of Clients / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /2005 Month Case Recd 09/ / / /2005 Statistical information also showed that Violations of Probation filed in 2005, were almost double those filed in Extending time supervised, via the VOP, partially explains why the number of cases supervised went up while new cases received went down- i.e. the average length of time under supervision increased. This reflects the policy of the department in attempting to reduce placement by giving opportunities, with the increased services and supports offered, to youth who would previously have been placed.

16 12 Juvenile VOP's Filed / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /2005 Month Violation Filed 10/ / /2005 A positive note is that case closings by category reflects that the number of cases closed due to the granting of early releases by the Family Court judges more than doubled. Several other new measures were implemented in To consolidate efforts, with resulting paper work reduction and facilitate timely response to the needs of sentenced youth, case plans are now completed by the officers preparing the predispositional investigations. These plans are then approved by the Unit Administrator, prior to assignment to the supervising Probation Officers, to be ready for immediate implementation. The plans are then reviewed and updated two months later to reflect progress made in addressing the needs and supportive factors identified at the predispositional investigation level. During 2005, new juvenile sex offender conditions of probation were designed and implemented. They were designed, with input from treatment and legal staff, to facilitate the provision of maximum community safety while the juvenile receives outpatient treatment with supportive services by the Probation Officer. Finally, during 2005, planning has been underway for the startup of two new programs within the unit in A juvenile electronic monitoring program will be implemented in early 2006, which will allow more young people to be supervised in their homes, with additional support and structure conducive to rehabilitation. Also, a Family Court Drug Court for Youth is being planned with an expected implementation date of the first quarter of This, particularly when combined with electronic monitoring will further enhance the department s ability to see that identified needs are appropriately addressed and supportive services are provided to reduce risk and increase supportive factors leading to reduced recidivism and healthier young people entering society as productive citizens.

17 PRETRIAL SERVICES UNIT Jonathan Heller, Unit Administrator Robert Dosiak, Senior Probation Officer Pretrial Services is a universal label applied to programming concerned with the assessment for potential release and monitoring of incarcerated, un-convicted criminal defendants. Pretrial service agencies exist in nearly every county in New York State, nationally and even internationally. Dutchess County is fortunate to have been involved in some form or another with providing pretrial service programming over the past 31 years. As such, the Pretrial Services Unit of the Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections has not only benefited from the evolutionary developments in the field, but has provided others with insights and innovations on both a state and national level. The Pretrial Services Unit remains primarily focused on providing Courts with another option to bail with the goal of reducing unnecessary pretrial detention. We are able to offer release services along a continuum of control. Cases are considered initially for those releases that are least restrictive, however, if release is not achieved, or the defendant presents a greater risk, more limiting release options, such as electronic monitoring, are considered. This approach has proven successful and serves in dispositional planning across the entire criminal justice community by providing other options and tools as alternatives to incarceration. Issues surrounding the Jail population demanded a greater emphasis on Pretrial Services for 2005, and the department responded. A partial reorganization was undertaken and three programs traditionally overseen by the Pretrial Services Unit were relocated to other divisions within the department. The Community Transitions Center (Day Reporting Program) was moved to the Special Services Unit and the Intensive Treatment Alternative Program s probation component (ITAP) as well as oversight of the Transitional Housing facility were moved to the Electronic Monitoring/Warrant Unit. (Further information on these programs can be found elsewhere in this report). Additionally, the Domestic Violence Probation Unit was merged into the Pretrial Services Unit. The rationale behind the reorganization was threefold: first, the programs

18 that were moved out were intensive and somewhat specific to the sentenced population, requiring involvement of staff resources to the detriment of the pretrial mission. Second, it was determined that more of the focus and resources needed to be placed at the assessment stage of the process and third, within the pretrial segment of Domestic Violence services, there were efficiencies to be gained by eliminating duplications, a task made easier by being housed under one roof. As programs and needs change, the unit will continue to adjust to provide the best possible services around pretrial release, including taking full advantage of advances in technology. This past year saw the full implementation by the department of the State s E-justice program, allowing for the instantaneous retrieval of criminal history record information right at the officer s desktop. The Pretrial Services Unit was instrumental in bringing this technology to the entire department. What follows are brief descriptions of the Pretrial service programming as well as statistical highlights. Included in the highlights this year is a measure noted as RU (recommendation unnecessary). Cases are coded RU to indicate that release from custody was achieved by the defendant prior to the completion of the investigation (generally by means of posting bail or bond). Remembering that the goal of the program is to reduce unnecessary pretrial detention, thus saving the jail space for those defendants who pose greater risk, the inclusion of the RU statistic gives a better overall picture of the outcomes, specifically in calculating how many defendants actually were released relative to the number of interviews conducted. Noteworthy for the period of 2005 is that while interviews increased by 7% over 2004, releases showed an increase of 12%. Pretrial Services Workload Statistics INTERVIEWED RELEASED RECOMMENDATION UNNECESSARY (39% of those interviewed were recommended and released) ('Recommendation Unnecessary' indicates that release from custody was achieved prior to the completion of the investigation)

19 PRETRIAL CASELOAD PROGRAMS By Percent of Cases Received in 2005 (1010 cases received) 16% 2% 3% 34% 5% 35% 5% ROR RUS EM ITAP TRANS CTC DV ROR/RUS Began in 1974 as strictly a jail based program, the least restrictive release option remains true to its roots in the Manhattan Bail Project of the 1960 s. An interview is conducted, information is verified and a validated risk tool is applied to make a determination as to the risk of failure to return to court. This program has expanded as needs presented to

20 include screening at the jail twice daily on business days and once daily on weekends and holidays. Additionally, officers within this unit staff the higher volume courts in order to preclude the incarceration of those defendants deemed appropriate and eligible for release. Screening and evaluation for these least restrictive programs occurs following the guidelines set by both the State and National Pretrial standards. As such, evaluations are completed expeditiously and the information and recommendations are forwarded to the Courts as soon thereafter as possible. Those defendants deemed ineligible are carefully reviewed for more restrictive programming such as Electronic Home Detention, ITAP, and Transitional Housing, all covered elsewhere in this report. All ROR Cases Received 2005 by Month 120 Count of Cases / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /2005 Month Released 09/ / / /2005 All ROR Cases Closed by Month Count of Cases / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /2005 Te rm Da te 08/ / / / /2005

21 Drug Courts Drug Courts were introduced to Dutchess County in Presently there are Drug Courts that operate in the cities of Poughkeepsie and Beacon. Additionally, the department maintains a consulting and service role in the Family Treatment Court. The Office of Probation and Community Corrections provides designated staff assigned to each court. The Probation Officers have specific roles and duties but work as part of the Drug Court Team. Each Drug Court operates independently and both Poughkeepsie Drug Treatment Court and the Beacon Drug Court are designated a Hub Drug Court, meaning that the courts accept cases from other jurisdictions. All three of the Drug Courts have become successful diversion programs in their own right and are a welcome addition to alternatives available. Domestic Violence Unit The Domestic Violence Unit consists of three officers who supervise a caseload of probationers sentenced to probation or pretrial release for a Domestic Violence Offense, or who have a documented history of domestic violence. Offender accountability and victim safety are prioritized. To that end, the officers assigned to the DV Unit work closely with staff from Domestic Abuse Awareness Classes (DAAC), Battered Women s Services, the Victim s Unit of the District Attorney s Office, and Probation s Victim Services Unit. The DV Unit is also part of the Dutchess County Domestic Abuse Response Team (DART), which is a multi-agency response to a DV arrest made by the City of Poughkeepsie Police Department, the Town of Poughkeepsie Police Department, Dutchess County Sheriff s Office, NY State Police or Beacon Police Department. The protocol is as follows: the arresting officer contacts Battered Women s Services at the scene so that the victim can be offered services immediately; BWS contacts Probation to report the arrest; Probation contacts the Victim s Unit at the DA s Office, which verifies the victim s wishes and looks up prior domestic incidents (even those which did not result in an arrest); and after all information has been gathered, Probation submits the criminal record and an arraignment recommendation to the Court. When a DV arrest occurs after hours, the police agency holds the offender in lock-up until the following morning. DART s goal is to make pre-arraignment recommendations in an attempt to promote a consistent response to Domestic Violence arrests. The following is a profile of the DV caseload (snapshot 12/31/2005):

22 DV Caseload (12/31/2005) 7 Male Female 62 DV Caseload (12/31/2005) 10 Felony Misdemeanor 59 DV Caseload (12/31/2005) Criminal Contempt Assault Menacing/Harassment/ Endangerment 16 Other

23 Electronic Monitoring/Warrant Unit Jack Kryzak, Unit Administrator John P. Egan, Sr. Probation Officer Vicki Bradley, Sr. Probation Officer Electronic Monitoring has been one of this department's major Alternatives to Incarceration programs for supervising adult pretrial and sentenced defendants since This technology allows probation officers to continuously monitor defendants/probationers in their homes through the use of a small transmitter attached to the ankle and a receiver installed in the home. Teams of probation officers working around the clock, seven days a week, supervise individuals on this program. Pagers carried by probation officers enable them to respond immediately in the event that an individual on Electronic Monitoring leaves his or her residence without authorization. The courts use this alternative to incarceration option extensively because it allows individuals under intensive supervision to remain employed and productive, while enabling probation officers to respond immediately in the event of a violation of program rules. The Electronic Monitoring program has had an enormous impact on managing the jail population over the years. During 2005, 455 new Electronic Monitoring cases were received from the courts, constituting a significant reduction in total jail days served by defendants. EM Cases Received Monthly 2004 vs JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC The Warrant Bureau is also a part of this Unit. A probation officer assigned to the Warrant Bureau oversees efforts to apprehend individuals for whom judges have signed Violation of Probation warrants. This officer works closely with local and state law enforcement agencies to enhance execution of probation warrants. Swift action on Violation of Probation warrants helps hold these offenders accountable and serves to ensure community safety.

24 DEPARTMENTAL ARRESTS 2005 Felony Misdemeanor VOP VOP Electronic Monitoring Other* TOTAL January February March April May June July August September October November December TOTALS: * Includes Bench Warrants, Arrest Warrants and remands from Transitional Housing. In October of 2005, the Intensive Treatment Alternative Program (ITAP) and the Transitional Housing Program (THP) were moved from the Pretrial Services Unit to the Electronic Monitoring Unit in order to consolidate supervision of those defendants who participate in both programs. Because Electronic Monitoring officers are available to respond at any time seven days a week, it was determined that supervision of these program participants would be more effective if placed within the Electronic Monitoring Unit. Local Conditional Release Program A probation officer in the Electronic Monitoring Unit had coordinated this Program. Under this program, inmates sentenced to more than 90 days in jail could apply to the Local Conditional Release Board for early release from the Dutchess County Jail. After reviewing information supplied by the Office of Probation and Community Corrections, the local commissioners made a decision on the inmate's application. Although this option has not been used extensively in recent years due to the emphasis on this department's pretrial programs, this program offered suitable candidates the opportunity for release under supervision of this department. However, as of September 1, 2005, Article 12 of the NYS Correction Law and related provisions of the Penal Law expired. Consequently, all decision making with respect to individuals eligible for local conditional release, as well as the supervision of those released, was returned to the New York State Board of Parole and the Division of Parole respectively.

25 mhill 03/14/20061:07 PM

26 PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATIONS UNIT Joanne Nellis, Unit Administrator Carol Hooper, Senior Probation Officer Donna Rhoads, Senior Probation Officer Tom Morris, Senior Probation Officer Presentence Investigations are an integral component of the Probation Department and the entire criminal justice system. Presentence investigations provide information to the local criminal courts and to correctional agencies about the nature of the people and the criminal activity that come before them. Information contained in these reports is also utilized by most agencies the offender comes in contact with after sentencing. The consolidation of the Investigation Unit, which was instituted in mid 2004, has proven to be successful. The reports provided to the courts in 2005 were more consistent overall, thus providing a better product to the courts. Presentence Investigations are generally ordered by a court after a defendant has been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony offense, but before he or she is sentenced. The Presentence Investigation provides the court with background information that may be used in determining an appropriate sentence. The scope and nature of the investigation is established in the NYS Executive Law, Criminal Procedure Law and Penal Law and NYS Division of Probation and Correctional Alternatives. Areas to be investigated and information included in the report are a description of the present offense, legal history, social history, education/employment history, economic status, personal habits and physical and mental condition. We also have a section devoted to outlining the areas of need determined by the LSI-R. This information is compiled into a report and submitted to the court to be used in determining an appropriate sentence. This report is also used extensively by probation officers during the supervision process, by the New York State Department of Correctional Services in classification of inmates and by New York State Parole in determining parole suitability. Treatment agencies also rely on the Presentence Investigation for information regarding the treatment needs of an offender. In 2005, the Investigation Unit focused on the incorporation of the LSI R

27 (Level of Service Inventory Revised) into the investigation and disseminating the information provided by the use of this tool. The LSI-R is an assessment tool that is used to measure a given offender s risk of recidivism. It also identifies the specific criminogenic needs an offender may possess. If these needs are successfully addressed, the offender s likelihood of reoffense is reduced. The LSI-R is a valuable tool that is being used to assist in programming decisions and case planning in order to allocate departmental resources in a more efficient manner. LSI assessments are performed at the Pre-sentence Investigation stage and reassessments are completed every six months thereafter by a supervision officer. The reassessments serve to measure an offender s progress toward certain goals that, if achieved, could lower their risk of reoffending. If a lower overall risk score is achieved the offender may be allowed to transition to a less intense level of supervision. The use of the LSI-R continues to expand as it is fully implemented both within and outside of the Investigations Unit. The number of LSI-R s completed in 2005 was 1396; this is more than double the number completed in The Investigations Unit completed 62% of the total number of LSI-R s in The remaining LSI-R s were completed by officers in the supervision units. Five officers in the Investigations Unit have reached a level of proficiency with the LSI- R, that they have been given the ability to score their own assessments without the need for review by the LSI-R coordinator. In the coming year more and more LSI-R users will be given the ability to self-score their LSI-R assessments. The following table illustrates the number of LSI-R assessments completed in 2005 by month as well as referral source. The number of assessments completed by supervision officers has increased substantially this year. Referral Source Jan Feb Mar LSI-R s Completed in 2005 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Source Total PSI Pre-Plea Supervision Special Monthly Total ,396

28 As mentioned before, a completed LSI-R assessment results in an overall risk score. The overall risk score is used to classify offenders into supervision levels. The following graph shows the percentage of assessments which resulted in a particular supervision level being recommended. LSI Classification Breakdown 2005 Minimum 36% High-Medium 21% Maximum 5% Low-Medium 38% It should be noted that not all offenders are necessarily assigned to the supervision level recommended by the LSI-R assessment. Recommended supervision levels may be overridden, and offenders on probation as the result of sex offenses, domestic violence, and habitual DWI offenders are normally supervised intensively regardless of their LSI-R score. These offenders are additionally assessed by a treatment professional, using an assessment tool geared toward those populations. Nevertheless, the LSI-R is useful with these special populations as well as it helps in determining risk and needs in all areas that must be addressed to support law abiding behavior. In 2005 the department received orders for 1301 criminal investigations with 1271 investigations being completed by the eight (8) officers assigned to this unit. The investigative, analytical and writing ability of these officers produces comprehensive, first- rate reports that are submitted to the 29 local courts and 2 Dutchess County Courts. As evidenced by these numbers, the Investigation Unit has both a high volume of work and a great deal of responsibility in the criminal justice system.

29 Training in 2005 for the Investigation officers continued to be centered around the use of the LSI-R and motivational interviewing. However, officers also attended training seminars and workshops in substance abuse, domestic violence, firearms and officer safety. Victim Services are a key component of the Investigation Unit. Victim Services The Victim Services Unit (VSU) is devoted solely to the needs of victims. The unit is comprised of a part time senior probation officer (Carol Hooper) and a part time crime victim specialist/advocate from Family Services, Inc. (Kelly Bunt). The team works to address the needs of victims and give them a voice during the criminal justice process. From 1/1/05 through 12/31/05, probation officers made a total of 258 referrals to this unit. The number of referrals for 2005 increased by 62% over the number of referrals made in 2004(160). The referrals are made primarily on behalf of victims of serious violent crimes, including, but not limited to: murder, manslaughter, physical and sexual assaults, domestic violence, burglary and robbery. The remaining referrals were primarily for victims of crimes related to harassments, fraud, criminal mischief and for general victim services. The increase in referrals represents the ongoing trend in the community and more specifically, in this department, to recognize the special circumstances and related needs that result when an individual becomes a victim of a crime. Most of the referrals to VSU were made by the Presentence Investigation Unit and were requests for victim impact statements. In most cases the victim was contacted, services were offered and a victim impact statement was submitted to the court for sentencing of a defendant. In addition to helping victims complete victim impact statements and address matters directly related to the criminal prosecution of a case, the VSU also refers victims to counseling through Family Services, assists them in completing Crime Victim Board applications for restitution (primarily medical), provide court accompaniment and make referrals to other appropriate support services.

30 Even with additional attempts to contact victims, as the VSU is designed to do, the VSU was unable to get a response or locate 23% of the victims for victim impact statements or general victim services. Interestingly enough, although the number of referrals has significantly increased, the no contact/no statement number remains the same. It should be noted that due to the nature of some offenses, victims often fear for their safety and often do not want to make an official statement or stay involved, as they may fear retaliation. Additionally, the VSU is designed to have follow-up as needed for cases where the defendant was sentenced to probation. In many cases the victim has established a working relationship with the VSU as we are usually the first contact with this department for many victims. The VSU acts as a liaison between the probation officer and the victim, thereby ensuring that victim rights and needs are primary, while promoting offender accountability and preventing the triangulation between the victim, the defendant and the supervising probation officer. This situation is most common in domestic violence cases. In addition to formal referrals to the VSU, the DV officers make routine followup requests when they would like to check in with a victim or to advise them of a probationer s non-compliance, violation status, etc. These cases are informally tracked. The VSU averages about DV follow-up referrals a month. The VSU also responds to miscellaneous victim issues as referred by the supervising Probation Officers (sometimes as crisis drop-ins). Also, on several occasions the DA s office refers victims to the VSU for assistance in dealing with victim issues during the course of the criminal prosecution of the case. Probation Officer Melissa DiBernardo

31 Investigations Statistics 2005 INVESTIGATIONS RECEIVED Felony Misdemeanor Male Female Male Female Pre-Plea Pre-Sentence CRD Totals Total (Fel. & Misd.) Total Received 1301 INVESTIGATIONS COMPLETED Felony Misdemeanor Male Female Male Female Pre-Plea Pre-Sentence CRD Totals Total (Fel. & Misd.) Total Completed 1271

32 Karen O Connor, Unit Administrator Jane F. Salese, Unit Administrator Vivian Cirillo, Senior Probation Officer Dan Bryant, Senior Probation Officer ADULT SUPERVISION UNITS Recently, the field of probation and community supervision has been greatly impacted by outcome based management programs and new research on recidivism and on the process through which long term change is effected in a person s attitude and behavior. In fact, a review of this Department s Annual Reports over the past several years consistently reflect these themes, introducing concepts like outcome measures, results driven management, evidence based practices and the use of new assessment tools like the LSI-R. (Level of Service Inventory Revised). Specifically, current research in the field of community corrections indicates that success rates in reducing recidivism and effecting lasting change in offender s behavior is directly related to the use of proactive models of supervision. Briefly, supervision is viewed in these models as an intervention and the officer as a change agent who utilizes the contact (traditionally defined as the face to face interview between the offender and the officer) to motivate and empower the offender to address criminogenic factors (i.e. substance abuse, unemployment), which contribute to criminal behavior. In this year s Annual Report, an attempt will made to identify and assess where the Adult Supervision Units are in the process of learning, embracing and applying the concepts and models as indicated above. We will also highlight some changes already made in the units that manage the largest and most varied population of adult offenders. The following measures have been undertaken in order to implement the 8 principles of Effective Supervision. One of the changes instituted over the past year is that administrators from both Adult Supervision Units have worked closely together and met to produce one narrative to submit for this year s Annual Report. This relatively minor change nonetheless reflects a real shift towards results driven management and the related goal of utilizing departmental resources in the most efficient and effective manner. For example, although both units currently perform the same function (supervising adult offenders in general supervision caseloads), they have historically worked independently, met for separate staff meetings and covered different geographical areas. However, it has been our experience that as concepts inherent in evidence based practices are practically applied, change within the structure of the units, and indeed the entire department, becomes driven by the need to provide services to offenders based on need and risk ( criminogenic factors) rather then strict geographic location or specific offense. For example, officers from both units could be partnered to provide intensive supervision for

33 offenders whose assessment scores mark them as possessing a high recidivism risk. Research clearly indicates that these offenders are in greater need of external controls such as the use of surveillance, treatment interventions, collateral and community contacts, and drug tests. Although work on this type of caseload is still in the formative stage, we have moved forward in developing two administrative caseloads designed for offenders whose assessments indicate a low recidivism risk. Again, this decision was based on research indicating that offenders with a low risk of recidivism could actually re-offend at a higher rate if the external controls applied to the higher risk offenders were applied to them. Hence, we have not only acknowledged the need to move away from previous one size fits all supervision strategies, but have taken practical steps in that direction. It is also noteworthy to mention that the two Adult Supervision Units met this year for an unprecedented joint staff meeting/training session, which, per staff feedback, was considered helpful, informative and unifying. Another notable change has been the ongoing development of groups and referral sources within the department, making it much easier for officers to guide offenders towards appropriate and necessary services and redefining the traditional concept of the face to face contact. Within the past several years, the department has developed internal resources including various anger management programs, a cognitive behavioral treatment program for drinking drivers, and an employment training and placement program. In some instances, offenders may be directed to attend these programs in lieu of a face to face contact with his or her officer, in order to address a specific criminogenic need. A number of officers will be trained again this year to develop and run other types of groups as well. Despite much progress and many positive developments, movement towards the use of evidence based practices has been neither simple nor easy. Understanding the change process, introducing the LSI-R, learning about cognitive behavioral techniques and implementing motivational interviewing has been met by both supervisors and line staff with a mixture of interest, hope, frustration and uncertainty. There are many who embrace it exuberantly and clearly see its potential for effecting real and lasting change in an offender s behavior. Others are struggling; many with the very real problem of high volume caseloads, seriously disturbed and/or mentally ill offenders, arranging training opportunities and issues inherent in the change process itself. Both administrators and line supervisors recognize these issues and have met with some success in addressing them through a Quality Control Committee, which meets monthly. Although planning has been the primary focus of this committee, efforts have already supported organizational changes and, in certain instances, the committee has recommended that modifications be made in policy and procedure in order to make them more compatible with current practice. The committee also understands that professional development is key to any reform initiative and is attempting to help staff embrace core concepts by seeking appropriate training opportunities and encouraging on site coaching, peer supervision and supervisory assessment.

34 The reality of evidence based practice is that if implemented properly, it will alter the basic foundation of traditional community corrections programs. Implementing a model that actually changes the basic foundation of an agency is a daunting process. It requires a belief in and an understanding of the process itself as well as a genuine desire to achieve better outcomes. As administrators of the Adult Supervision Units, we believe we possess both the understanding and the desire. We also remain optimistic that as we navigate staff through this process, evidence contained in Annual Reports of future years will reflect that all of our efforts had a positive and tangible impact on the offenders we supervise and the communities we serve. Marist Intern Andrew Fernandez & Probation Officer Jen Conklin

35 ADULT SUPERVISION CASES RECEIVED/RELEASED RECEIVED RELEASED 2005 Felony Misdemeanor Total Felony Misdemeanor Total January February March April May June July August September October November December TOTAL

36 SPECIAL SERVICES UNIT Sandra Ackert, Unit Administrator Robert Davis, Senior Probation Officer Pam Francis, Senior Probation Officer Jeffery Walraven, Senior Probation Officer Diane Whiteman, Senior Probation Officer The Special Services Unit deals with high-risk populations requiring intensive supervision. It includes the STOP DWI, Sex Offender and Day Reporting (CTC) Programs. Officers in this unit work closely with treatment providers, advocates, police agencies, prosecutors, victims and community agencies. Smaller caseloads, extensive fieldwork, increased surveillance and specially trained officers are hallmarks of this unit SPECIAL SERVICES SENTENCED CASES ONLY Cases Received Felony Misdemeanor Male Female Male Female DWI SOS CTC* Cases Closed Felony Misdemeanor Male Female Male Female DWI SOS CTC* *Does not include pre-trial cases

37 2005 SPECIAL SERVICES VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION Filed Revoked Probation Modified Probation Continued/ Withdrawn/ Dismissed/ Pending Fel Mis Fel Mis Fel Mis Fel Mis Fel Mis DWI SOS CTC The above numbers, which include Youthful Offenders, represent sentenced cases placed on intensive, specialized supervision caseloads. In addition, there were 78 sex offender pre-sentence investigations completed by a Senior Probation Officer in the Sex Offender Program. DWI = Driving While Intoxicated SOS = Sex Offenders CTC = Community Transition Center/Day Reporting

38 COMMUNITY TRANSITIONS CENTER (CTC) A day reporting program, CTC is an alternative to incarceration, providing not only security to the community through a highly structured and closely monitored format but also offering the opportunity to address identified criminogenic needs. It is recognized that individuals who need education/employment, life skills, appropriate companions and leisure activities, and family support, as well as those involved with illegal substances are more likely to commit crimes. CTC staff, including a Senior Probation Officer, attempt to successfully integrate offenders into community institutions and positive lifestyles. An important piece of the CTC program is the use of a cognitive behavioral curriculum, Moral Reconation Training (MRT), shown to be particularly effective with the criminal justice population. Community service is another integral component of the CTC program. CTC serves mostly young people between the ages of 16 to 25 years old, either as sentenced or pre-trial cases. The program has a capacity of 60 individuals. CTC works closely with the Jail Transition program, ensuring a seamless delivery of assessment and intervention sometimes begun while the offender was incarcerated. A Senior Probation Officer on site provides intensive supervision and monitors compliance with Court Orders. Positive outcomes in the form of reduced recidivism and a lower jail population are desired as goals of the program. Mary Ellen Still, Probation Director Marty Lynch, Vice President of Programs, CTC Claudette Renzulli, CTC Director

39 Sex Offender Program SEX OFFENDER PROGRAM The Sex Offender Program provides closely monitored, intensive supervision to approximately 85 sex offenders at any given time. Additionally, a Senior Probation Officer writes pre-sentence reports on convicted sex offenders as ordered by the courts. Probation officers in this unit work closely with sex offender therapists, most notably with those at the Relapse Intervention for Sex Crimes Program run by Family Services, Inc. who meet with probation staff on a bi-weekly basis for case conferencing. Officers maintain contact with the New York State Sex Offender Registry to ensure that offenders meet reporting requirements. The department also works collaboratively with the Registry, the New York State Division of Probation and Correctional Alternatives and local law enforcement to confirm addresses of registered offenders of all levels. The Dutchess County Sex Offender Management committee, formed in 2002, has continued to work towards the more effective management of sex offenders in Dutchess County. In 2003 a $218,242 grant was received from the United States Department of Justice to enhance current juvenile and adult programs in Dutchess County through a victim centered approach. The Committee continued its work in 2004 and 2005, conducting a system assessment, analyzing system gaps, and beginning to develop implementation plans to address critical issues. Spearheaded by the Office of Probation and Community Corrections and the Relapse Intervention for Sex Crimes Program of Family Services, Inc., the committee also includes representation from Sexual Trauma and Recovery Services, Dutchess County Jail, Dutchess County Social Services, Dutchess County Supreme and County Courts, County Attorney, NYS Division of Parole, District Attorney s Office, Department of Mental Hygiene, Sheriff s Office, Public Defender s Office, Astor Adolescent Services, Family Court, and the Center for Sex Offender Management. Senior Probation Officer Jeff Walraven Senior Probation Officer Pam Francis

40 STOP DWI, our longest running Special Services program, has a very simple but vital mission: To promote public safety by reducing recidivism. Probation officers in this Unit have smaller caseloads so they can devote a significant amount of time to surveillance of high-risk DWI offenders, to communicate with treatment professionals and to explore new intervention strategies. These officers spend approximately 50% of their time in the field doing home visits and employment visits as well as bar checks and motor vehicle checks. Frequently, this fieldwork is done on weekends and late evenings when offenders are more likely to be tempted to violate their conditions of Probation e.g. use alcohol and/or drive without a license. The Senior Probation Officer, Robert Davis, who is a Credentialed Alcohol and Substance Abuse Counselor, has the responsibility of providing consultation and education not only to officers in the DWI Unit, but also to other staff throughout the department. Since DWI offenders make up approximately 1/3 of the adult supervision caseload, use of efficient and effective intervention strategies is imperative and has been the driving force to explore innovative research based techniques. Cognitive Behavioral groups, a research based approach, have been offered since 2001 through a grant from Stop DWI. Dr. Elizabeth Teed, who facilitates two CBCS groups weekly, also assists with the professional development of probation staff by helping them introduce cognitive behavioral techniques into their supervision practices.

41 Financial Unit Sharon Harrison, Business Manager Theresa Brown, Principal Account Clerk The Financial Unit was created in September of 1998 due to the increasing amount of financial procedures being handled by the Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections. During 2005 the positions assigned to the Financial Unit consisted of a Principal Account Clerk, two Accounting Clerks, an Office Assistant, a Program Assistant and the Business Manager, who supervises the Unit. The Unit responsibilities are constantly increasing and include the processing of all the billing, contracts, grants and claims, budget oversight, purchasing, RFP s, bids, vouchers, restitution collections for crime victims and the collection of supervision fees and a wide variety of other miscellaneous financial matters. The restitution/fee committee that was created in 2003 through our Management Team continues to study additional procedures to assess their efficiency and to create new procedures as they become necessary. This committee is ongoing to address issues that arise relating to the supervision fee/restitution collection. The Unit is now handling an average of 1209 restitution and 2480 supervision fee cases. This is a significant increase in the open cases. At the end of 2005 the Unit began working on a new Financial Management System that the County will be using in This requires extensive training and new ways of doing our work. We also began working on a new system for restitution/fees that will be included in the new case management system for our whole department.

42 RESTITUTION AND SUPERVISION FEES COLLECTION MONTH SUPERVISION RESTITUTION SURCHARGE COLLECTED COLLECTED COLLECTED TOTAL JANUARY $10, $18, $ $29, FEBRUARY $12, $26, $1, $39, MARCH $12, $29, $1, $43, ST. QTR. SUB TOTAL $35, $73, $3, $112, APRIL $12, $25, $1, $39, MAY $11, $20, $1, $33, JUNE $13, $34, $1, $49, ND QTR. SUB TOTAL $37, $80, $3, $122, JULY $11, $18, $ $31, AUGUST $11, $24, $1, $37, SEPTEMBER $11, $27, $1, $39, RD. QTR. SUB TOTAL $34, $71, $3, $108, OCTOBER $11, $24, $1, $37, NOVEMBER $10, $25, $1, $37, DECEMBER $11, $23, $ $35, TH QTR. SUB TOTAL $34, $73, $3, $110, YEARLY TOTALS $141, $298, $14, $454,586.94

43 Peggy Milone, Support Services Assistant Lori Olheiser, Senior Office Assistant Our Support Services Unit currently consists of 17 employees. The Support staff is essential to the efficient functioning of the department. Support staff assist in both the Beacon and Poughkeepsie Offices. Receptionists greet and direct large numbers of people each day as well as field hundreds of telephone calls. Support staff assists Probation Officers with the final preparation of their reports for the courts, and they are responsible for the department payroll and the maintenance of all case files. All of these daily challenges are routinely met with the professionalism required. Nancy Spilbor Office Assistant Peggy Milone Lori Olheiser Pam Lane Stacey Bauer Peggy Hill Karen Phillips Maureen Roddy Ava Mays Heather Manning Casandra Roman Lisa Lanigan Danielle Verrigni Katrina Buttitta Tanya Samuels Willie Zack Support Staff Staff from the Support and Finance Units

44 Training Professional staff are required to complete twenty-one hours of training each year. Training for probation officers must encompass a wide range of topics in order to equip them with the tools necessary to perform their duties. Consequently, the average probation officer receives more than double the required twenty-one hours of training each year. We are extremely fortunate to have adequate training monies made available by the county to address staff and department needs. Major training events for 2005 included: One additional staff member was trained as a facilitator for a cognitive/behavioral curriculum. We were, therefore, able to facilitate two groups simultaneously to address anger issues; one comprised of females and a male group. Our two Family Court units received CPS Mandated Reporter training. Most officers continued to receive training in motivational interviewing and cognitive/behavioral approaches to supervision. We were very fortunate to have been able to retain Dr. Beth Teed as a consultant who not only provided training in cognitive/behavioral techniques to the entire staff, but also provided individual work with the probation officers and probationers in implementing the skills. All probation officers received training in E-Justice, a secure website for officers to access the New York State repository for criminal history record information. A second probation officer completed G.R.E.A.T. Officer training. This is an evidence based gang prevention curriculum that is taught in schools. She will be teaching this curriculum in the Poughkeepsie City Schools in addition to the probation officer who is currently teaching in the Poughkeepsie City Middle School. One probation officer represented Dutchess County as one of four counties representing New York State to be trained as a team by the National Institute of Corrections as Offender Workforce Development Specialists. Our probation officer, along with two other county probation officers, went on to receive national certification as global career development facilitators. She, in collaboration with the Department of Labor, has facilitated two groups of Dutchess County probationers in Ready, Set, Work, a program developed to build skills in obtaining and keeping meaningful employment. We plan to continue this endeavor in Staff from probation and other criminal justice and community service agencies participated in a two-day training provided by the National Institute of Corrections in the area of women s issues in the criminal justice system. A work group was formed as the result of this training to follow up on action steps developed at the workshop. Robert McGrath provided probation and RISC staff training on the use of static risk assessment instruments (Static 99 and RRASOR) and dynamic risk assessment instruments (Sex Offender Treatment Needs and Progress Scale) in addition to providing an overview of sex offender risk assessment. We continue to participate with local police, parole and federal agencies in Operation Impact activities.

45 Officers continued to recertify to carry Capstun for the department. We currently have about 70 professional staff members who qualify to carry Capstun for the department. Three probation officers completed the long course for Defensive Tactics. Every other month throughout the year, officers who completed the long course can, and are strongly encouraged to, attend the three-hour refresher Defensive Tactics course. Practical Application techniques were incorporated into the Defensive tactics reviews, which included sending teams into the community to search for absconders and execute probation warrants. We continue to provide firearms training and certification to staff. Currently there are 46 staff who meet the state requirements. Thirty-six of them also meet departmental requirements to carry a firearm on the job. In house E-Justice training, provided by Probation Officer Bob Richer and Unit Administrator Jon Heller PUBLIC ACCESS DEFIBRILLATION PROGRAM Dutchess County has developed a Public Access Defibrillation Program (PAD) to increase the chances of survival for citizens and/or staff members who may become victims of cardiac arrest. The Dutchess County Office of Probation and Community Corrections became a PAD site in September Since that time, 12 people have been trained as lay rescuers in the use of the Automated External Defibrillator (AED) by the County Health Department. Having the AED on site with trained officers and the entire department participating in drills has helped us develop new skills to meet staff and community needs.

46 Senior Probation Officer Carol Hooper (left) was honored during the 2005 National Crime Victims Week for striving to make a difference in the lives of crime victims from our community. Unit Administrator Joanne Nellis (right) presented the award. Dutchess County hosted the Mental Health Juvenile Justice conference for New York State. (left to right) James McGuirk, Executive Director, Astor Clinic Mary Ellen Still, Director, Office of Probation and Community Correction Betsy Brockway, Director of HHSC Karen Trokan, Children s Services Coordinator, Dept. of Mental Hygiene (front row) Ina Berg, LCSW, Mary Ellen Still, Jennifer McGahan, (back row) Gus Tsoubris Ph.D, Mike Sowul LCSW, Barbara Schumacher, Karen Token LCSW, Dan Meyer Ph.D, Frank Desiervo, Jim McGuirk Ph.D