1993-18027-Resolution No. 93-051 Recorded 6/3/19931
f
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON _._.
Approval of the County Diversion 0126-1115
Plan for 1993-94 Fiscal Year, for
Deschutes County, Oregon.
9"3-X802'7
RESOLUTION NO. 93-051'
WHEREAS, Deschutes County is a participating county,.,)i,.,the
Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium; and.,', .
WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Board of Commission,0, k�as
reviewed the 1993-94 Diversion Plan submitted by the Centrad dnd
Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium; and
WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners support
the 1993-94 Diversion Plan and the programs and services contained
therein for the diversion of youth from the Juvenile Training School
of the State of Oregon for the counties of central and eastern
Oregon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Deschutes County Board
of Commissioners support approval of the 1993-94 county Diversion
Plan for the Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium,
marked Exhibit "A," attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein, and approval of the budget contained therein.
DATED this day of
A T:
Recording Secretary
, 1993.
BOARD OF OUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DE HU ES COUNTY, OREGON
E SCHUNGEN, Commiss
BARRY H. 'SLAUGHTER; Commissioner
MICROFILMED
JUL 1319193
ISI I�,.-..�-
31993
1 - RESOLUTION NO. 93-051 (6/2/93)
EXHIBIT "A"
0126-1116
COUNTY DIVERSION PLAN
as prepared by:
Central & Eastern Juvenile Justice Consortium
Central & Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium, (CEOJJC ), is
comprised of County Juvenile Departments from the counties of Central &
Eastern Oregon. Those counties include: Baker; Crook; Deschutes;
Gilliam; Grant; Harney; Hood River; Lake; Jefferson; Malheur; Morrow;
Sherman; Umatilla; Union; Wallowa; and, Wasco. CEOJJC presents this
plan for the diversion of youth from the Juvenile Training School of the
State of Oregon for the counties of central and eastern Oregon.
The Juvenile Departments of the Central & Eastern Juvenile Justice
Consortium, hereinafter referred to as the Consortium, are committed to
a balanced approach of Juvenile Justice. That balanced approach involves
three (3) essential elements, and those are:
1) Community Protection: The credibility of the Juvenile
Justice system depends, in part, on an appropriate response to the
behavior that endangers others or their property. Recognizing that as
the primary mission of the Juvenile Court system is essential to our
process.
2) Accountability: Whether or not punishment of an offender
is seen as deterrent to criminal conduct is not the issue here, rather
we accept the premise that there are special needs of youth that are
fundamental to the child development process. One of these needs is the
process of being held accountable for inappropriate conduct. The
Juvenile Department Directors of the counties of Central & Eastern
Oregon believe in the mandate that youth need to be held accountable.
We find that the people of the communities we serve expect us to hold
youth accountable for their criminal and otherwise inappropriate
conduct. It is our view that accountability is social responsibility.
3) Competency Building: Basic to appropriate child development
is the need for self-esteem, socialization, and the building of
appropriate skill levels to allow a child to succeed in life. In a plan
that is to be a balanced plan, must take in account these special needs
of building the competency of the community's youth.
These three necessary elements must be present and kept in equal value
for our juvenile justice system to be effective. we believe our
mission, in doing this, is not incompatible with the juvenile
corrections plan for reducing the size of the state training school.
Further, we feel that the planning process herein will facilitate our
mission of developing youth service resources for the juvenile courts of
Central & Eastern Oregon. To that end, we plan to participate in and
vigorously work for the success of this plan.
A. Persons Representing the Counties:
The counties will be represented by an Executive Committee of juvenile
court directors with specific representation of County Commissioners.
This Executive Committee will empower an administrative director to
speak for them as a general administrator of the project.
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 1
as submitted by: Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium
0126-111' - - ,
B. The business address & phone number of the Consortium is
P.O. Box 356
Ontario, OR 97914
(503) 889-8802.
C. The work would be performed in the following manner:
1) Predisposition and Evaluation Services: These services will
be conducted by each county using resources presently in place in the
community or contracted for outside of the community.
Educational and Vocational Assessment will be performed primarily by the
local school district with contracting with separate providers as
specialized needs dictate. while the services are being provided
primarily within the county of residence, they may be provided in other
counties where the services exist, but is a deficit in the county of
residence. This will be accomplished with a cooperative agreement
between the counties and may be facilitated through the consortium.
Relevant data pertaining to the youth's delinquency history is readily
available in every juvenile department. Personal data, regarding
medical, psychological and psychiatric information will be provided
either through a public agency by way of a contract, or with a private
provider. Relevant social data is also available through the Juvenile
Department as his community information. Individual education plans,
when available will be provided as well as any information as to the
employment history or substance abuse history of the youth. This
information will be gathered by the juvenile department by the with
jurisdiction over the youth.
Information relating to the school history, family background, referral
history, prior out -of -home placements and employment history will be
gathered by the Juvenile Department staff for each county with
jurisdiction over the child who is the subject of commitment. County
Juvenile Departments will complete the admission summary form as
presented by Children' Services Division. Information related to the
medical data, psychological or psychiatric data, educational testing and
substance abuse may be contracted for with other providers, public or
private, (within the county or within a reasonably short distance
outside of the county).
2) Process for completing the standard diagnostic and
evaluation information requested in Section 2.2, B of the
planning guide.
CEOJJC will use the format provided by the Division. Each County
will complete the admission summary and will provide it at the time the
youth is delivered to the closed custody population. CEOJJC expects to
address the issue of failure to complete an admission summary directly
with the county involved. CEOJJC will assist Children's Services
Division in assuring that all participating counties comply with this
requirement.
3) Disposition of Parole violators:
Following is an agreement that was reached by the board of
directors of CEOJJC during a meeting held on the 10th of January, 1991.
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 2
as submitted by: Central and Bastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium
Y 0126-1118
Revocation--- Parole Officers and Juvenile Department Counselors
are to decide when a child needs to be revoked from parole and returned
to the institution. It is understood that return to the institution
does not necessarily follow a parole revocation. The diversion
specialist is to be notified and alternatives are to be considered.
Morrisey hearings are to be held in the county of jurisdiction with the
direct involvement of the Juvenile Department. Parolees are not to be,
brought back to the institution with the expectation that the Morrisey
hearing is to take place there. It is the responsibility of the
committing county to arrange for a Morrisey hearing. CEOJJC will assist
Children's Services Division in assuring compliance with this
requirement by the participating counties.
4) Type of Community programs the counties will use to
maintain its Training school capacity:
The following is a list of community programs that have been utilized
during the last contract year directed toward the maintenance of the
training school capacity:
Intensive supervision with Community Attention, Inc.,
Umatilla County Juvenile Detention Facility, The Umatilla
County Secure Treatment Progam, Dr. Robert Staunton(Sex
offender treatment), Parole independant living and Sex
offender proctor homes, Klamath County Youth Care Center,
Personal Services Contract w/ Community Youth Development,
Detention Sack -up, Diagnostic Evaluation Services, Sex
offender client specific programing, Deschutes County
Community Alternative Services (Sex offender services) and Client
Specific Programming.
The program committee of CEOJJC has determined that the priority areas
for funding this fiscal period include:
A. Administration, Coordination and Monitoring
B. Evaluation and Assessment
C. Secure Detention
D. Community Alternative Programs.
It was determined by the program committee that a priority
should be given to existing programs that can demonstrate effectiveness
in limiting the closed custody population of the state training school.
Specific areas of priority include: Sex offender programs, drug and
alcohol treatment programs and the client specific process. It is clear
to the program committee that the funding this fiscal period will have
to be more specifically targeted to problem area that will further
reduce the closed custody population. Therefore, some of the programs
that were funded during the last fiscal biennium will probably not be
continued. Due to the nature of our process, CEOJJC legally required to
conduct a separate budget process which is outside of the county budget
process and that of the State of Oregon. A request for proposals is
being developed and the program committee will determine the types of
services which will be purchased. Due to the precarious nature of
funding for programs as a result of measure 5, a decision
has been made not to submit a two (a) year plan. This plan
is for the first year of the 93-95 biennium
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 3
as submitted by: Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium
0126-1119
4) Detention Hack -up:
Through the efforts of Juvenile Court Resources, Inc. Children's
Services Division, and Deschutes County, a detention facility has been
opened in Bend, Oregon. Further, a detention facility is now open in
Pendleton, and a detention program exists in The Dalles. These three
facilities will be used to provide detention back-up for youth who are
on probation and parole. Juvenile parole may refer youth to detention
as an alternative to revocation or may place a youth in detention
pending revocation proceedings. Detention is subject to the statutory
review provided by Oregon Revised Statutes and is subject to statutory
standards. The Consortium will pay for detention back-up based on a
voucher signed by the Juvenile department of the county of jurisdiction
for the child.
The form of an intergovernmental agreement between this Consortium and
Children's Services Division regarding parole officer responsibility to
the juvenile court jurisdiction will need to be negotiated between the
Executive Director of the Consortium, and the appropriate authorities of
Children's Services Division.
6) Policy for CAP management
The available closed custody bed space will be shared by the
participating counties based upon need. If a county is over its
designated CAP, its population will be scrutinized first in an attempt
to make room for new commitments when we, as a group of counties, are at
risk of exceeding our allotted space in closed custody.
At the time that a county Juvenile Department is aware of an
impending committment to the State Training School, the juvenile
Department Director shall confere with the Executive Director of CEOJJC
to facilitate compliance with the CAP for the region.
Problematic to the parole system, is that the commitment of children to
the juvenile training school is in the hands of the juvenile judge, and
decisions related to parole is in the hands of the institutions.
Therefore, the management of the CAP is a result of recommendations to
the court on the one hand, and recommendations to Juvenile Corrections
on the other. Each county of the Consortium will develop its own
hearing process for parole revocation. The methods used will be either
judicial proceedings before the juvenile judge or referee, or
administrative hearings as prescribed by Juvenile parole.
when we are within four (4) youth of the designated cap, the
executive director of CEOJJC will, after confering with juvenile parole
counselors and juvenile department directors, recommend youth who could
most reasonable be directed toward community placement. The names of
those youth will be submitted to the Superintendant of the State
Training School for what ever action is deemed by that person as most
appropriate.
All counties are to use the diversion specialist as the first line
of defence against a committment or a revocation. No youth should be
committed to the institution without having first been referred to the
diversion specialist.
The executive director of CEOJJC is to be notified as soon as a
youth is identified as being in danger of commitment. The executive
director of CEOJJC is to keep a list of those who are on suspended
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 4
as submitted by: Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium
0126-1120
commitments and should have a working knowledge of the potential of the
future closed custody population.
The executive director of CEOJJC is to communicate with the
counties regarding the situation of the CAP and is to let the county
Juvenile Departments know when the population is reaching a crisis
point. The Executive Director of CEOJJC will work toward achieving a 4
(four) bed margin of the CAP for the central and eastern Oregon
counties. Therefore, with a recognized CAP of 45 beds the goal of
CEOJJC will be to remain within 41 beds.
CAP management is to be driven by agreement. Youth are not to be
arbitrarily removed from the institution or the community with out the
agreement of the Juvenile Department, Juvenile Parole and CEOJJC.
D. Statement of Positive Reaulta:
As a Consortium of county juvenile departments, participating
counties will abide by the capacity limitations by utilizing community
resources in innovative ways and in developing new services as needs are
identified and as funds are available.
The Counties of CEOJJC anticipate maintaining a reduced closed
custoy population during the contract period. The Juvenile Departments
of the participating counties are presently engaged in an extensive
planning process that will facilitate a regional Juvenile Corrections
plan as envisioned in HB 3438 of the 1991 Legislative Assembly.
Further, the planning seeks to expand the regional planning process to
other juvenile justice services as well.
The counties of CEOJJC anticipate reducing the closed custody population
of the area through specifically targeting services for the most high
risk youth who have demonstrated to be most problematic for the CAP.
These issues include: Sex offenders, Drug and Alcohol abusing youth and
youth with special needs. The evaluation of the results will be
accomplished by monitoring the number of commitments and revocations for
our area. A database is still being developed to assist the juvenile
departments in getting information concerning youth that are at risk of
commitment to the state training school and those youth on parole.
This information system is being developed by the Children and Youth
Services Commission. it is the opinion of those participating in this
effort that such information will allow us to more realistically plan
for the development of resources that will systematically effect the
population to be served.
Budget Detail:
Consultation Detail
A. Administration, Coordination and Monitoring ...............$74,000.00
B. Secure Detention (backup detention).......................$22,500.00
C. Community Alternative Programs .......................... $371,073.00
This budget is designed as a proposed budjet only. Budget law for the
state of Oregon requires that we conduct public hearings and that we
advertise our budget. Further, our policy requires that we review our
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 5
as submitted by: Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium
0126-1121
programs and make new determinations each year concerning the efficacy
of the services that we purchase.
A final budget will be submitted to Children's Services Division on or
about the 14th day of June 1993. Copies of this plan have been sent to
all of the counties of Central and Eastern Oregon to be presented to
their County Commissioner, Juvenile Judges and Juvenile Services
Commissions. The time allowed to get that information from all of the
counties was not sufficient to have it done by the 12th of March.
Time table for the RFP process
1993-1995 Diversion Planning
Feb.26, 1993
The 93/95 Diversion Plan Submitted to the
Juvenile Court Directors through the
Email system
March 12, 1993
The 93/95 Diversion Plan submitted to CSD
with any revisions
March 15, 1993
Request for proposals mailed to providers
and advertised in local papers.
April 26, 1993
Completed proposals due to the program
committee and CEOJJC office by 5:00 PM
MDT.
April 30, 1993
Notice of budget committee meeting to be
advertised in local papers.
May 10, 1993
Budget meeting - Pendleton - 10:00 am PDT
May 10. 1993
Notice of Budget hearing to be published
May 24, 1993
Budget Hearing
June 14, 1993
Budget sent to Children's Services
Division.
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 6
as submitted by: central and Sas tern Oregon Juvenile Justice Consortium
0126-1122
VALUES:
Following are values agreed upon by the Juvenile Department Directors of
the Counties of Central and Eastern Oregon.
1. All children of eastern Oregon can become responsible and
contributing people. Given the challenges that lie ahead, we connot
afford to lose a singel young person to the problems of delinquency,
drug and alcohol abuse, or chronic unemployment. Therefore, regardless
of the presenting problem, it is our duty to develop and share resources
region wide to enable the young people in our care to become productive
and resourceful people.
2. Our region is our community. Our responsibility to the youth
in eastern Oregon communities is not bound by conty lines or city
llimits. Therefore, the programs that we finance and operate have open
access to all counties within the region.
3. We covenant with our communities that we will balance the
measures that we take with children. We will take actions so that the
communities are better protected from delinquency, the offende3r4s and
service system are held accountable, and the children evbentually become
more competant and productive due to our interventions.
4. Our commitment to share is not dependent on reciprocity. If
one of our counties is struggling through strenuous economic
circumstances, then the region will only press harder to make certain
that county's children have acces to necessary resources.
5. we believe that the real strength of our organization lies in
the talent, experience, diverse perspectives and commitment of all the
counties represented within CEOJJC. It is our belief that region wide
planning, program development and delivery brings the highest quality
service possible to the region and individual counties. In CEOJJC, we
believe that no one of us is as valuable alone as we are together.
6. We value partnership in all our efforts. We recognize that we
are not alone in our desire to serve the needs of troubled youth in our
communities. we are willing, therefore, to put our resources at the
disposal of other persons or organizations to enhance the services to
the youth of our communities.
1993-95 County Diversion Plan 7
as submitted by: Central and Eastern Oregon Juvenile Justioe Consortium