HomeMy WebLinkAbout20120686.tiff WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Justice Services Division
1008 9`h Street- P.O. Box 758
1012 MAR -b A II: 54 Greeley, Co 80632
Phone: (970) 336-7227
�I I� RECEIVED Fax: (970) 392-4677
Memorandum
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Doug Erler
Re: 2011 Annual Report---Justice Services Division
Date: March 1, 2012
"PASS AROUND ITEM ONLY"
Enclosed for your review is the 2011 Annual Report for the Justice Services Division. If you
would like an electronic version, please let me know and I will get this to you.
Thank you for your ongoing support and guidance.
C➢�mocyvt,CS��1w� JSDb L4
3 , \a 2012-0686
•
Weld County ,Justice Services Division
Annual Report
2011
L.- c, iti:: gaz
4;_ at.
tt: '--may \ fa)1 2 •
0 ISII
c TY
`` GOUN
Justice Services
1008 9th Street
P.O. Box 758
0 Greeley, CO 80632
1
• Foreword
I am pleased to report on the progress of the Weld County Justice Services Division.
2011 was a demanding year for our Division; we were faced with a myriad of staffing
challenges (FMLA, maternity leave) but remained inventive to produce strong
performance outcomes. Our focus remains on establishing ourselves, strengthening our
services, solidifying partnerships and complementing our local criminal justice system.
In late 2011, the Division presented an idea to the District Attorney, Board of County
Commissioners and County Administration to create an Adult Diversion Services
program. This idea was well received and ultimately approved by the Commissioners for
implementation in 2012.
This report summarizes the work of our Division in 2011. As always we thank the Weld
County Community Corrections Board, Pretrial Services Advisory Board, our three (3)
sub-contracted vendors, ICCS, BI Inc., and Rocky Mountain Offender Management
Systems, Probation and Parole, Sheriff's Office, District Attorney's Office, Public
Defender's Office, various attorneys, and treatment agencies in our community for all of
their hard work in helping our Division. We are especially grateful for the support of our
Department Director, Monica Mika. We also work closely with and thank Don Warden,
those in the Finance and Administration Department, Building and Grounds personnel,
and our County Attorney Bruce Barker for their invaluable assistance. Lastly, we
• appreciate and thank the Board of County Commissioners for their ongoing leadership.
The cost of providing the services and complementary functions of our criminal justice
system are substantial. Our work is intended to find innovative and cost-effective
enhancements at certain levels. This strengthens public safety and the quality of life of
Weld County citizens, while supplying opportunities for individuals in our criminal justice
system to demonstrate their potential as contributing, responsible members of society.
Respectfully submitted,
?ytkoptA---
Doug Erler, Director
Justice Services
•
2
Weld County Justice Services Division
Mission
To support and improve the functions of our Justice System by:
• Providing innovative, cost effective planning strategies and enhancements;
• Fortifying public safety and quality of life of our citizens; and
• Supplying opportunities for persons processed by our Justice System to
demonstrate their potential as contributing, responsible members of society.
Vision
We envision a fair and equitable criminal justice system that identifies the public safety
needs of our community while providing creative, innovative, and cost effective
opportunities for positive outcomes for those who enter it.
Values
Commitment - we expect a passion for service from our staff and a demonstrated
investment and responsibility in our work;
411 Courage - we will be bold, stand by our convictions and be ceaseless in our search for
excellence;
Inclusiveness - we embrace actions and behavior that honor and respect the
contributions and diversity of our staff and our community;
Integrity - we will demonstrate professional ethics, moral courage, and strength to
fulfill the trust of our community;
Respect - we will respond to all those we encounter in our work with courtesy and
civility that recognizes their individuality and value; and
Trustworthiness - we commit ourselves to be the highest level of accountability as
stewards of the authority public funding granted to us.
fis -
2 nt* r
atill
• Citizens of Weld County
Board of Commissioners, Weld County
Monica Mika, Director of Finance &Administration Department
Weld County Justice Services Division
Pretrial Services Administration Criminal Justice Advisory
Advisory Board Director (Doug Erler) Committee (CIAC)
Pretrial Services Unit ii Pretrial Services Supervisor (1) Community Corrections Unit
(Melissa Saindon) Office Technician III (1)
(Sharon Behrens) Weld County Community
Pretrial Services Specialist(3) Corrections Board
(Maryann Prieto, V. Van Driel,
Tracy Feit) - -
Pretrial Services Clerk(1)
(Melissa Depriest)
Agreements& Partnerships Sub-Contract Service Providers
BI Inc. Intervention Community Corrections Services
Intervention Inc. (ICCS)
RMOMS LLC. (Residential, non-residential correctional services)
BI & RMOMS LLC (monitored sobriety &electronic
(monitored sobriety/ electronic monitoring services) monitoring services)
•
4
• PRETRIAL SERVICES
The bail decision, to release or detain persons pending trial and the setting of terms
and conditions of bail, is a monumental task which carries enormous consequences not
only for pretrial defendants but also for the safety of our community, the integrity of
our judicial process, and the utilization of our criminal justice resources - most notably
at our county jail. The bail decision is the responsibility of the Court. In Colorado, the
risk of failure to appear in Court and danger to the community are the two (2) primary
considerations when the Court is deliberating a pretrial release/detention decision.
The Pretrial Services Unit comprises of five primary staff and two ancillary staff
(Director and Community Corrections Office Tech III).
We aspire to deliver the following:
• Impartial screening of all defendants, regardless of current arrest charge;
• Verify interview information and do criminal history checks;
• Assess risk of defendants' pretrial misconduct through objective means and
presentation of recommendations to the Court based upon their risk level;
• Do follow up reviews of defendants unable to meet original conditions of release;
• Accountable and appropriate supervision of those released in the community, to
include proactive measures such as court date reminders, face to face contacts,
• monitored sobriety and electronic monitoring;
• Report ongoing compliance of defendants to Judicial Officers; and
• Develop process and outcome measures for improved delivery of services.
SOME ACHIEVEMENTS in 2011
1. Wrote and finalized all policies and procedures;
2. Hired Pretrial Services Clerk; established all work duties and training expectations;
3. Put $20 Pretrial Services fee into practice upon each defendant ordered to Pretrial
Supervision;
4. Pretrial Services fee collection of $20,719; double the amount of original projection;
5. Responded to 2.5% budget reduction to Professional Services Fund ("Defendant
Services Fund") used to help pay for monitored sobriety and electronic monitoring
services and assist defendants during the pretrial stages of their cases), created
priority criteria;
6. Low defendant Failure to Appear (FTA) and Rearrest Rates;
7. Ongoing staff training; of note, everyone attended the annual Colorado Association
of Pretrial Services (CAPS) conference and the Director attended the National
Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) conference;
8. Weld County continues to participate in regular activities of CAPS; PTS Supervisor
serves as the Secretary for this professional association; and
9. Provided staff support to the 10 member Pretrial Services Advisory Board; facilitated
• all meetings and functions.
5
INTERVIEWS
2011 INTERVIEW DATA BY GROUP:
Possible interviews : 3,496
Actual interviews completed : 1,825
• 657 felonies
• 1, 166 misdemeanors
• 2 traffic
Interview rate : 52%
Personal Recognizance Recommendations : 307 ( 1 . 7% recommendation rate)
Gender Percentages : 77% male / 23% female
2010/ 2011 Actual Interviews Completed - Comparison
250
200
150
100 ® 2010
. 2011
50
0
tA c�atJ air PQ�\ �aJ ���� ���� ���'� ���t �O��t ���t ����
\a � Q' ,`e/ Oc, re (de'
oO
2010 Interviews Data (to compare with 2011)
Possible interviews : 4,007
Actual interviews completed : 2, 164
Interview rate : 54%
6
0 CASE MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION
2011 CASE MANAGEMENT / SUPERVISION DATA BY GROUP:
Office Intakes completed : 1,421
• Office case load as of January 1, 2010 : 297
• Office case load as of January 1, 2011 : 709
• Office case load as of January 1, 2012 : 785
Status Letters submitted to Court: 57 Complaint Affidavits submitted to DA: 152
Case closures : 1,820 Cases with monitored sobriety condition : 160
average/mo (80% of all cases in 2011 had this
condition of bond )
2010/ 2011 Intakes Completed - Comparison
180 -
160
0 140
120
100
80 - 2010
60 .• 2011
40
20
0 i i i i i i i
�asA �a� a6\ �� �aA , c\e \A ��h; sec o�6 �6 �6
,ate , PQ P\ Q�e' oci o,\e/ ec'e�
2010 Case Management / Supervision Data (to compare with 2011) :
Intakes : 1, 547
Status Letters : 77
IllComplaint Affidavits to DA's Office : 94
2011 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE DATA BY GROUP (OVERALL) :
Court appearance rate : 97. 1% (2 .9% Failure to Appear Rate)
Public safety rate : 93.7% (6.3% Re-Arrest / New Charges Alleged Rate)
2010/ 2011 Failure to Appear Data - Comparison
20
18 -
16
14
12
10
8 —2010
6 — 2011
4 -
2
0
asA asA tr P��\ �A ,��� ���a �,2� met °sec `p s
i& ec kies5e
111
2010/ 2011 New Charges Alleged/ Re-Arrest Data - Com arison
20 18
16
14
12
10
8 — 2010
6 — 2011
4
2
0
��ft) ��atA air P��\ �aa ��e \\) DES\). ENO NO
ENO NO
E
ce
2010 Performance Data (to compare with 2011) :
Court Appearance Rate : 97.4%
Public Safety Rate : 96.8%
8
2011 Case Disposition Percentages:
■ Sentenced (76%)
■ FTA (9%)
▪ Dismissed (7%)
■ Bond Revoked (6%)
• PTS Modified (2%)
2011 Fee Collection Data :
Start date : 2/22/2011 $ 20,793 .00 collected in 2011 41 $ 1,890 . 27 average/mo. 90% Collection Rate ($2,337 in outstanding balances)
SUMMARY OF DATA:
- The number of cases closed in a month directly influences spikes and drops in
FTA Data and Re-Arrest / New Charge Data . Data fluctuates based on the rate of
closing cases since the majority of case management/supervision data is inactive
data .
- There were 511 fewer interviews completed at the jail in 2011 than in 2010. This
is directly proportionate to the staffing shortages we experienced throughout the
year.
- Determining final disposition on re-arrests and new alleged charges will be a
focus in 2012 . Currently, above data only captures charges (not convictions) .
- The comparison charts, while interesting, may be better utilized with 2011/2012
data . Some of our current procedures were implemented mid-2010 (i .e. tracking
Public Safety Rate) and do not reflect a full year's worth of comparable data . In
addition, staffing shortages make it difficult to compare "apples to apples" ( i .e.
the unit suspended and reduced levels of services for extended periods in 2011 ) .
9
• Cost Comparisons
Below is an approximate cost comparison for Pretrial Services vs. jail incarceration on
an average daily basis per defendant, as opposed to housing them in our jail. In 2011,
we averaged 765 defendants per day under Pretrial Services Supervision at a daily cost
of $1.62. This figure was derived by dividing our budget for 2011 ($453,412) by these
765 defendants for one day, divided by 365 days for a per day cost of $1.62 (in 2010 it
was $2.69). These individuals remained under Pretrial Services Supervision for an
average of 138 days at a total cost of $171,023 (in 2010 it was $137,682 since the
average length of stay was 121 days). Housing these same 765 defendants in jail for
138 days at $59 per day (*) would likely (and understandably at its highest utilization)
cost Weld County approximately $6,228,630.
(*) The jail bed cost determination comes from conversations with our Sheriff's Office.
Cost Comparison for Pretrial Services vs. Jail Incarceration
Pretrial Services Jail Incarceration
Daily Pop. Length of Stay Cost/Day Total Cost/Day Total Cost
765 138 days $1.62 $171,023 $59 $6,228,630
• Comment:
This is an estimate of the cost savings of our Pretrial Services program. Please note that
these figures only identify defendants under Pretrial Services supervision and does not
address potential cost avoidance and/or savings associated with the function of
screening new arrestees for release from jail on bond. By providing the Court with
information about these arrestees, Judicial Officials are able to make informed decisions
about whether to release defendants and under certain conditions. Our Pretrial Bail
Reports furnished daily to the Court, assist in determining the release of arrestees, not
all of whom may be placed under our pretrial supervision.
ONGOING GOALS FOR PRETRIAL SERVICES:
Population targeting—each morning Pretrial staff identifies arrestees to interview;
this allows the Court to identify viable candidates to consider for pretrial release.
Investigation (interviews, verification, record checks) and risk assessment—
upon interviewing new arrestees, staff compiles a detailed Bail Report. The goal for
staff is to interview as many arrestees as possible, verify information collected,
review/perform criminal history checks and assess risk of defendants in a timely and
professional manner.
•
10
• Monitoring and supervision—as a condition of a defendants bond, the Court may
add Pretrial Services. Staff meets with all new defendants ordered by the Court, reviews
bond conditions and has every defendant acknowledge and sign a Supervision
Agreement. Every defendant is assigned to a Pretrial Specialist who establishes an
ongoing supervision plan; this often includes making referrals to community agencies to
deliver monitored sobriety and/or electronic monitoring of defendants.
Outcomes (pretrial release rates, failure to appear rates, re-arrest or new
crime rates)—staff seeks to achieve high pretrial release rates while maintaining low
failure to appear and re-arrest/new crime committed rates. These are the desired
outcomes of a successful and cost effective program.
Signs that Pretrial Services is effective: (areas that we continue to gauge)
✓ Growth in the percent of Pretrial Services recommendations followed by the
Court;
✓ Growth in the percent of defendants who comply with Pretrial Services
conditions; and
✓ Reduction in the percent of defendants held in jail on low money bonds.
• Impacts: (when efficiencies are realized these impacts may occur)
✓ Increase in the percent of defendants released from the jail while maintaining
high rates of court appearance and lawful behavior while on in the community on
Pretrial Services supervision;
✓ Decrease in the time it takes to achieve defendants' pretrial release from
custody; and
✓ Decrease in the jail population comprised of pretrial detainees.
•
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS rEtkealicilea*--
(Note: some of this information is detailed further in the a
R
forthcoming Weld County Community Corrections Board ` CONNUWI�tCCORRECTIONS
Annual Report for 2011). _
01
Community correctionsprovides a safe, constructive, and less
•
expensive alternative to prisons and jail for adults. In 2011 ,
adult community corrections programming in Weld County and
oversight saved taxpayers over $2.8 million dollars. In addition to being less costly than
jail or prison, the recidivism rates for offenders completing community corrections is
substantially lower than for those offenders released from prison or placed on parole.
Introduction
The Justice Services Division provides day-to-day administrative support to the Weld
County Community Corrections Board and serves as the intermediary oversight and
coordination entity for Weld County Government and with its sub-contracted vendors,
Intervention Community Corrections Services (ICCS), BI Inc. and Rocky Mountain
Offender Management Services LLC.
Services
■ Adult Residential and Non Residential Community Corrections Services
• Electronic Monitoring
• Monitored Sobriety
Administration
The nine (9) member Weld County Community Corrections Board, a statutory and
appointed Board (Colorado Revised Statutes, 17-27- 101 et.seq, and 18- 1 . 3-301),
manages the local responsibilities for the myriad of community correctional services in
Weld County/19th Judicial District. This Board, with the administrative assistance and
guidance of Justice Services, establishes and enforces standards of operation of its sub-
contracted vendors and in exercising independent authority to accept or reject certain
offenders referred for local placement. A percent of total allocated funds from the State
remains with Weld County to offset costs associated with the County's management of
all funds and administrative support to this Board .
BI Inc. and Rocky Mountain Offender Management Systems LLC. (RMOMS)
Weld County sub-contracts with BI, Inc. and RMOMS to deliver monitored sobriety and
electronic monitoring services to felony offenders under the care of the Department of
Corrections. Monthly billings are submitted to Justice Services, which are reviewed,
approved and processed to the State on behalf of the Community Corrections Board
and Weld County. Weld County retains 2% of these total funds (if fully expended) for
this administrative support assistance.
12
• Offenders under the community supervision of the Department of Corrections
and Parole served by these two agencies in 2011:
BI Inc. = 969 (for monitored sobriety services)
RMOMS = 1,509 (for electronic monitoring services)
Note--BI Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Geo Group, a worldwide provider of
various correctional services. GEO's headquarters are in California, Texas, North
Carolina and Florida.
RMOMS is a Colorado based corporation that provides services nationally. Their home
office is in Westminster, CO.
Intervention Community Corrections Services (ICCS)
Weld County sub-contracts with ICCS to provide residential and non-residential
supervision and services to adult felony offenders as referred by the Department of
Corrections, State Judicial Branch and/or Parole. ICCS is a nonprofit agency based in
Westminster, CO. They operate two other community corrections facilities in Lakewood,
CO and contract with various judicial districts in Colorado to deliver private probation
services.
• On a monthly basis, ICCS personnel submits offender billing invoices that require
review, approval and processing by Weld County and then to the Colorado Division of
Criminal Justice (DO). Payment by DO to Weld County and then to ICCS, is
coordinated by Justice Services. Weld County retains 4% of these total funds for daily
administrative support assistance. Considerable operational and facility oversight is also
part of the Division's tasks. In 2011, Justice Services processed over $2.4 million
dollars with 100% compliance with the DO. (We were one of only a few
counties/districts to balance and account for all funds.)
Referrals
By virtue of policy of the Weld County Community Corrections Board, ICCS is authorized
to accept certain offenders for placement to the community corrections facility. The
Board must directly approve all other cases (offenders). This is accomplished through
the Board's weekly Review Committee. In some instances, offender referrals are
reviewed at Full Board meetings.
Justice Services reviews all offender referrals to ensure compliance with Board policy.
The Board and Justice Services reviewed 1,368 offenders for placement consideration
in 2011.
• • 12 Full Board meetings conducted.
• 50 Offender Review/Screening Committees conducted.
13
• • Rejects by ICCS: 716 (77.91%)
• Accepts by ICCS: 203 (22.09%)
• Accepts by the Board: 285 (72.34%)
• Rejects by the Board: 109 (27.66%)
• Pending Cases: 37 (2.70%)
(these cases were referred to the program but had pending matters in other
jurisdictions)
• Cases referred but sentenced prior to date of Board screening: 17 (1.24%)
• Deferred: 1 (.001%)
• The Board also accepted 14 Intensive Supervision Program (ISP) offenders, and
rejected 9 (not included in above 1,368 total). **
**These are inmates serving a portion of their prison sentence in the community at an
approved residence and therefore participating in a form of non-residential correctional
supervision under the DOC. These offenders adhere to all DOC Code of Penal Discipline
regulations.
• APPROXIMATE COST SAVINGS (does not include ISP funds. There is also
some fluctuation of cost figures because State and County fiscal years differ)
POTENTIAL COST ACTUAL COST COST AVOIDANCE / SAVINGS
Daily Offender Reimbursement Total Potential
Population Rate from the State to Cost
201 Weld County = $2,563,981 = $5,502,375
(Residential and (includes
Non-Residential) x Residential, Non-
Residential and (minus)
Prison Bed ** $75.00 Administrative +
Cost/Day = Support)
x
Total Actual Cost
Days/Year = 365 Expenditures = $86,317 = $2,650,298
Total Potential Total Actual Grand Total of
Cost = $5,502,375 Cost = $2,650,298 Cost Avoidance
/ Savings to
Taxpayers = $2,852,077
• ** Prison Bed Cost per day is a general estimate (it is likely higher)
14
• Other Notable Achievements in 2011:
• Rent received from ICCS for use at the Community Corrections Facility was
$262,104. These funds are earmarked under Non Departmental Funds.
■ Processed $92,064 to support services for the Intensive Supervision Program for
the DOC. Two percent (2%) of these funds remained with Weld County.
• Justice Services processed all prepaid phone card orders from ICCS to SECURUS.
This work generated $6,300 for Weld County.
• The Division processed 188 Work Order requests from ICCS to help support the
facility. All requests are initially reviewed and approved by Division staff before
submittal to the Building and Grounds Division.
Community Corrections Unit Goals for 2012:
1. 100% fiscal accountability;
2. Ensure vendor compliance with Facility Lease Agreement;
3. Respond to, and maintain contract administration for Corrections Board; monitor
and track current State contracts/renewals in June; and monitor State budgetary
• and legislative matters which are potentially impacting the program(s);
4. Monitor the daily activities at the Community Corrections Facility, and of our vendor,
and give updates to BOCC and Administration as scheduled. Meet regularly with
vendors;
5. Write and distribute 2011 Annual Report for Community Corrections Board;
6. Update certain sections of"Offender Review, Placement and General Administrative
Policies and Procedures" manual for the Community Corrections Board;
7. Staff weekly and monthly meetings for the Community Corrections Board;
8. Continue with all data collection methods;
9. Continue to process all prepaid calling cards for ICCS and receive percent of funds;
10.Receive, review and approve Work Orders from the Community Corrections Facility
before submitting to Building and Grounds Division; and
11. Participate in regular activities of the Colorado Association of Community Corrections
Boards (CACCB). Weld County is a member of this professional association.
•
15
• ADULT DIVERSION SERVICES
Diversion Services is a process to help manage the flow of persons cycling through our
local criminal justice system. It involves suspending traditional criminal justice case
processing of a defendant's case through the DA's Office to avoid further penetration of
the defendant into formal Court proceedings. By doing so, workloads and costs are
realized for DA personnel and upon taxpayers.
This will be a new program for Weld County. Justice Services introduced this idea to the
DA's Office. It was approved by the Board of County Commissioners for program
implementation in 2012. An Adult Diversion Officer has been hired and is lodged in the
DA's Office. At such time the program stabilizes, is achieving a level of success, the
District Attorney and Justice Services Director will consider transfer of the program to
Justice Services.
With any new program, there will be many goals to achieve. It is hoped these
(minimally) will be the focus of the Adult Diversion Officer and the program:
GOALS:
• Establish eligibility criteria
• • Develop a referral process
• Identify and use assessment and screening tools
• Develop supervision strategies
• Create fee collection methods
• Determine participant termination criteria
• Create a Data Management System
• Identify and implement various reports
• Write a Policy and Procedure Manual
• Staff training and education
• Establish community interface and referral protocols
•
16
0
II
• 1.4i �
•
+&
'It's J
• •
�.% • ,
4. '4, _1 .
•.>
r r4, -.
IS t..
t > •'
'
_ ?_ 1. 4 •r1. r-I . , r-� - -I•
i ,
i
•'ice r . • r ir
• . • r
• `.
V
-- - I
. I
, i-
LA f i
Ju$TI
i 4 CE
SERVICES
i
di ,
. ,
: ,
t ni . . ....
I it-4
I
/! 9LS Y r11`..Jf/ialCid1 .' r f•_t. . T'..z
1
nit
0 linfilflasta's
Justice Services Division 2011
0
17
Hello