1-233 Program Locator County Healthy Community Probation Department Administrative Services Adult Supervision and Court Services Juvenile Supervision and Court Services Institutions Services Headline Measures 100% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0% Percent of Probationers Completing Probation without a New Sustained Law Violation 63% 07-08 61% 08-09 63% 63% 63% 09-10 Estimate 10-11 Percent of Probationers who Successfully Complete Treatment Programs 71% 07-08 11-12 71% 70% 70% 70% 08-09 09-10 Estimate 10-11 11-12 Program Outcome Statement The Adult Probation Division is broken into two distinct branches: Court Services and Supervision Services. Adult Court Services consists of the Investigation unit and the Pretrial unit. These two units have the responsibility to provide thorough, timely, and impartial information to the Courts they serve. The purpose of their investigations and reports is to provide the Court with sufficient background and criminal history information to facilitate the best judicial decision possible in pre-sentence and pretrial matters for adults. Adult Supervision Services has two intertwined goals. First, to maximize offender and community safety, Supervision officers enforce the conditions of probation and ensure that probationers are in compliance with court orders. Second, Supervision officers facilitate the treatment component of probation wherein the probationer receives treatment and other related services. These activities contribute to a positive lifestyle change thereby reducing the potential for recidivism. Services and Accomplishments The Adult Supervision and Court Services Program contributes to the Shared Vision of a Healthy Community by 2025 by supporting the Court s efforts to protect the community, allow deserving defendants the liberty to assist in their own defense, and impose the most appropriate sentence. Court Services manages the Pretrial Unit. Defendants are evaluated for Own Recognizance Release through a review of the defendants criminal history and the use of a risk-assessment tool. Court Services officers also encourage clients to participate in and comply with the Court process and facilitate opportunities for treatment during that process. Lastly, the officers provide the Court with sentence recommendations, including conditions of probation that maximize public safety, protect crime victims, and provide structure for adult offenders. As part of the conditions of probation, probation officers develop case plans to address the needs of probationers. Additionally, Adult Supervision and Court Services contributes to the Shared Vision of a Healthy Community by 2025 by providing over 2,400 probationers with specialized supervision programs that range in intensity according to the probationers supervision and treatment needs. Supervision services may include a range of tools, such as intensive supervision, community based monitoring, chemical testing, and treatment. Supervision may be limited for low risk offenders to include more general supervision services, including scheduled contacts with probation officers and progress reviews. Supervision Services officers collaborate with and provide mutual support to all levels of local, state and federal law enforcement. By participating in San Mateo County s Gang Intelligence Unit and the Western States Information Network, Supervision Services operates in a highly efficient manner to support public safety. Supervision Services includes the following specialized assignments: Intensive Supervision; Sex Offenders; Violent Offenders; Drug Court; Bridges Program; Proposition 36; Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction, known as the Pathways Program; Reentry Program; and Deferred Entry of Judgment. In addition, the Adult Division uses a Computer Assisted Case Services Unit, formally known as CAST to provide limited case processing services to probationers. This allows the division the best possible use of its limited supervision resources. Together, these programs provide supervision services that include: community based
1-234 supervision; counseling; treatment referral; pro-active intervention; chemical testing; electronic monitoring; educational programs; vocational training; employment resources; and cognitive skills training, known as the Bridges Program. The following are major accomplishments in the current year: Completed an 18-month long training and implementation of the Correctional Assessment and Intervention System (CAIS) tool, a scientifically validated risk and needs assessment to improve case management, to allocate resources appropriately and to collect and track useful data Completed a year-long training and implementation of the Statemandated Static-99 tool for sex offender Obtained the services of an IT consultant to conduct an assessment of the integrity of the current database, recommend changes, and implement agreed upon changes Conducted approximately 50 anti-gang presentations in various schools and before several city government agencies and reached 2,700 citizens since July 2009 Story Behind Performance A large part of the Court Services Unit s success is due to the ongoing collaboration and reciprocal cooperation between unit management and the Court. The high quality of assessment, reporting and supervision is due to quality training and unit management. With the Court s willingness to be actively involved in workload issues, the Probation Department has been able to manage its resources to maintain quality reports in spite of staff reductions. In previous years, the number of cases referred by the Court determined the number of reports written. This year marks the fourth fiscal year in which the unit counted all of the reports that were written and submitted to the Court including Investigation Reports and special reports requested by the Court. It should be noted that pretrial supervision has little resemblance to courtordered supervised probation. Defendants under pretrial supervision have not surrendered their legal rights; as a result, pretrial officers do not have the same authority to search, chemical test, or arrest as probation officers. The Court Services Units continues to experience difficulty meeting the demand for bilingual services necessary to meet the current needs of the Department. Although bilingual staff frequently assists non-bilingual staff, many non-english-speaking probationers are unable to fully benefit from probation when supervised by nonbilingual staff. The shortage of bi-lingual staff also has the side effect of limiting exposure of existing bilingual staff to other phases and opportunities in the Probation Department. Even with these limitations, the quality of this unit s efforts ensures that approximately 98% of all court documents meet or exceed department standards of legal viability, accuracy, impartiality, informative content and timeliness. Consistent with FY 2008-09, the volume of reports written in the first half of the current fiscal year is slightly lower than what Court Services expects to complete in the second half of the year. The fluctuation in the volume of court reports is due largely to the effect that the summer and winter holidays has on court report assignments received from the Court. Compared to FY 08-09, the number of pre-trial services investigations is decreasing. By the end of the year, Court Services expects a decrease of approximately 163 investigations. The decrease in this measure reflects fewer people booked in to county jail; when fewer people are booked into jail, fewer investigations are conducted. The Adult Division continues to place a high number of probationers in intensive supervision programs, including: general intensive, domestic violence, violent offenders, sex offenders, and the Pathways Program for mental health offenders. Almost two-thirds of clients placed on intensive supervision complete the grant of probation without a new sustained law violation. The Division also continues to place a high number of probationers in relapse prevention programs. Relapse prevention programs include the Deferred Entry of Judgment, Prop 36, Drug Court, and Bridges programs. Clients in these programs are referred to one or more community based treatment programs. Of the total number of clients in treatment programs, slightly more than two-thirds of them successfully complete them in a given reporting period. Probationers have the most success in Bridges and Drug Court, moderate success in Deferred Entry of Judgment, and low success rates in Prop 36. The Adult Division s Prop 36 success rates are comparable to other counties in the State. In response to the loss of State funding of Prop 36, the Department supervises only new felony Prop 36 cases, with ARRA funding directed by Alcohol and Drugs. New misdemeanor cases are assigned to Court Probation. Misdemeanor Prop 36 cases assigned to Probation prior to July 1, 2009, have been placed on the banked caseload. In the past, the ability to accurately track successful completion of treatment has been fraught with technical problems. To respond to this challenge, the Department has obtained the expertise of an IT consultant familiar with the Departments database to build a new treatment tracking module of the information management system. The completion of the new module should be implemented by December 2010. The Division s CAST program has undergone several reorganizations in recent fiscal years to respond to a reduction in personnel and resources and an increase in case transfers. The banked caseload continues to face significant changes that began in July 2008, most notably receiving all misdemeanor Prop 36 cases. With sustained funding cuts to Prop 36, the banked caseload will continue to experience an increase in cases. In light of the County s structural budget imbalance and current hiring freeze, the Division will continue to evaluate the operation of the CAST program to determine how this unit will operate in the future. Major challenges over the next two years will be: To guide the Division through the transition of several key senior management changes To increase ability to respond to bi-lingual workload To provide sufficient training and practice opportunities to improve staff skills and increase the number of trained officers
1-235 To implement an on-going training plan for staff and managers To continue efforts to respond effectively to gangs-related crime in the County Program Objectives The Adult Division will meet performance targets by doing the following: Apply for Formula Grant Funding to Implement an Evidence-Based Probation Supervision Program and Prepare for Mandatory Compliance under State SB 678 Apply to the California Emergency Management Agency for seed money under an ARRA formula grant available to counties to assist in the implementation of an evidence-based probation supervision (EBPS) program and align supervision services with forthcoming State mandates Develop SB 678 work plan to guide Division through the goals and objectives of the EBPS grant Formulate an SB678 workgroup responsible for key implementation steps Continue participating in SMC ARRA Workgroup and report required data under this ARRA supported Cal EMA grant Staff an EBPS unit with grant-funded officers Report on supervision performance measures required under SB678 Ensure 90% of All Pre-Trial and Court-Ordered Reports are Completed Accurately and Submitted Within Established Time Frames Monitor Court Submissions Cross train municipal and superior court investigation staff Rotate officers through court officer assignments to spread those skills more widely Track and manage surges in investigation referrals Train new staff in time management techniques Provide appropriate training for all new staff Work with database workgroup to identify needs and priorities for Court-ordered reports Assist workgroup in prioritizing improvements to ensure unit can deliver reports to the Court accurately and on time Identify the ways in which the new database can improve and streamline the Court Report process Train Officers in the Use of Writing Case Plans with the Correctional Assessment and Intervention System (CAIS) tool by December 31, 2010 Work with CAIS training team to develop Division policy for case plan writing using the CAIS tool Achieve CAIS case plan writing certification for 100% of officers by December 31, 2010 Implement new case plan policy as one of several new policies outlining evidence-based practices
1-236 Performance Measures Summary Table Performance Measures FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10 Estimate FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 What / How Much We Do (Effort) Number of reports written 4,472 4,222 4,200 4,200 4,200 Number of completed pre-trial services 10,409 9,563 9,400 9,400 9,400 investigations (1) Number of defendants granted pretrial 1,757 1,786 1,600 1,600 1,600 release (2) Number of probationers placed on: - Relapse prevention supervision services - Intensive Supervision - CAST 2,056 1,027 1,146 1,375 1,002 2,893 850 1,100 2,800 850 1,100 1,200 850 1,100 1,200 How Well We Do It (Quality / Efficiency) Number and percent of reports submitted to Court within established time frames 4,426 / 99% 4,175 / 99% 4,100 / 98% 4,100 / 98% 4,100 / 98% Number of reports per officer per year 258 273 220 220 220 Staff to client ratio 1:90 1:60 1:58 1:80 1:90 Is Anyone Better Off? (Outcome / Effect) Number and percent of reports not requiring modification by the Court Number and percent of probationers completing probation without new sustained law violation 4,432 / 99% 4,184 / 99% 4,100 / 98% 4,100 / 98% 4,100 / 98% 2087 / 63% 2,600 / 61% 2,100 / 63% 2,100 / 63% 2,100 / 63% Number and percent of probationers who successfully complete: - Bridges - Proposition 36 - Other treatment program --- / --- --- / --- --- / --- 33 / 78% 399 / 44% 1,044 / 46% 38 / 85% 36 / 44% 1,399 71% 38/ 85% 36 / 44% 1,399 / 46% 38 / 85% 36 / 44% 1,399 / 70% Percent of probationers who successfully complete treatment program 71% 71% 70% 70% 70% (1) The decrease in this measure reflects fewer people booked into county jail; when fewer people are booked into jail, fewer investigations are conducted. (2) As the number of investigations decreases, the number of defendants who are granted pretrial release decreases.
1-237 Resource Allocation Summary 2007-08 2008-09 Revised 2009-10 Recommended 2010-11 Change 2010-11 Recommended 2011-12 Salary Resolution 144.0 145.0 145.0 132.0 (13.0) 132.0 Funded FTE 142.0 142.9 143.6 129.6 (14.0) 129.6 Total Requirements 18,951,345 19,021,269 19,988,712 19,285,400 (703,312) 19,288,224 Total Sources 7,101,041 6,366,037 7,185,008 6,632,070 (552,938) 6,454,101 Net County Cost 11,850,304 12,655,232 12,803,704 12,653,330 (150,374) 12,834,123 NCC Breakdown A-87 Cost Plan 388,552 360,692 (27,860) 360,692 Mandated Services 10,922,781 10,789,153 (133,628) 10,958,424 Non-Mandated Services 1,492,371 1,503,485 11,114 1,515,007 Discretionary Net County Cost The portion of this program s FY 2010-11 Recommended Budget which is funded by the General Fund or Net County Cost (NCC) is $12,653,330 or 65.6% of which $1,503,485 or 11.9% is discretionary. This discretionary amount includes Mandated Services currently provided with no maintenance-of-effort or local match requirements, and discretionary services that include; C.A.S.T (Computer Assisted Supervision Team) Administrative Caseload, Pre-Trial Services, Adult Supervision, Domestic Violence, the Bridges Program, the Court Work Program, and Adult Drug Court. FY 2010-11 Program Funding Adjustments The following are significant changes from the FY 2009-10 Revised to the FY 2010-11 Recommended Budget: 1. Adjustments to Provide Current Level of Services Budget adjustments have been made to reflect current costs for existing levels of service and performance: inclusion of merit increases, and increases in retirement contributions and health benefit costs; increases in safety equipment, provider contracts, leased facility charges and revenue collection charges and increased reimbursement (Intrafund Transfers) for administrative overhead that is allocated to operating programs through cost applied charges. (1,010,353) 893,202 (579,219) 0 1,324,336 (5)
1-238 2. Department Reorganization for Pre-Trial Services As part of the pre-planning of the Department reorganization, five new Group Supervisor positions will be added under the Pre-Trial Program to align with the duties of the unit and six filled Deputy Probation Officers have been deleted. The transition from Deputy Probation Officer to Group Supervisor is expected to have minimal impact on the supervision of Pre-Trial defendants. 0 565,035 0 0 565,035 5 0 (879,174) 0 0 (879,174) (6) 3. Reduction to Department s Net County Cost to Meet Budget To meet the County s requirement for a 10% reduction of Net County Cost, one vacant Probation Services Manager, two filled Probation Services Managers, one filled Deputy Probation Officer, one vacant Legal Office Assistant, one vacant Legal Office Specialist, and one vacant Legal Office Services Manager have been deleted. Duties for the Probation Officers and Probation Services Managers will be absorbed by sworn staff causing an increase in caseloads and supervisory span of control. Duties for the Legal Office Assistant, Legal Office Specialist, and Legal Office Services Manager will be absorbed by current staff and current services will be affected with higher overtime costs to produce required court reports in a timely manner. 0 (888,203) 0 0 (888,203) (7) 4. Evidence Based Probation Supervision Program A 36-month grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been received to support evidence based practices relating to the supervision of adult felon offenders. The funding has been appropriated to backfill the cost of for two Deputy Probation Officers who will replace Officers whose positions have been deleted. Funding will also cover contracts and equipment purchases. 0 (272,368) 0 0 (272,368) (2) 457,415 457,415 0 0 0 2 TOTAL FY 2010-11 PROGRAM FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS (552,938) (124,093) (579,219) 0 (150,374) (13) FY 2011-12 Program Funding Adjustments The following are significant changes from the FY 2010-11 to the FY 2011-12 Recommended Budget: 5. Adjustments to Provide Current Level of Service Budget adjustments have been made to reflect current costs for existing levels of service and performance: inclusion of merit and health benefit cost increases and reductions in contractual services. (177,969) 2,824 0 0 180,793 0