2005-955-Minutes for Meeting July 11,2005 Recorded 7/26/2005COUNTY OFFICIAL r
NANCYUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKDS yy 2005-955
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 4712612005 04:23:01 PM
II II I III IIIIIillllllll II III
2 0 -as
DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK
CERTIFICATE PAGE
J
J,
1f a A
This page must be included
if document is re-recorded.
Do Not remove from original document.
~,JT ES
& Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
❑ { 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ora
MINUTES OF MEETING
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
MONDAY, JULY 119 2005
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building, Second Floor - 1300 NW Wall St.., Bend
Present were Judge Michael Sullivan; Mike Maier, County Administrator; Dan
Peddycord, Health Department; Ernie Mazorol, Court Administrator, Becky
Wanless, Charity Hobold and Terry Chubb, Adult Parole & Probation; Andy
Jordan, Bend Police Chief; Tom De Wolf, Commissioner, Tammy Baney of the
Commission on Children & Families' Board; Jacques DeKalb, Defense Attorney;
Carl Rhodes, Oregon State Police; Mike Dugan, District Attorney; Muriel
DeLaVergne Brown, Health Department; Anna Johnson, Commissioners' Office;
citizen member Jack Blum; media representative Chris Barker of the Bulletin; and
visitors Mike Stafford, Public Safety Coordinator, Oregon Criminal Justice
Commission; and his son, Elliot.
1. Call to Order & Introductions.
The meeting was called to order at 3:35 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes of June 6, 2005 Meeting.
Mike Dugan moved approval, and Andy Jordan seconded; the minutes were
unanimously approved.
3. Presentation of the 2005-07 Parole & Probation Community Corrections
Plan.
Becky Wanless gave an overview of the document, referring to the table of
contents. In particular, House Bill 267 mandates evidence-based practices, and
funds awarded to contractors in the community must be using these practices.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 1 of 9 Pages
Her department is also utilizing these practices. Adoption of the document is
required by the Oregon Department of Corrections, and it must describe the
services provided by the department and the cost of those services.
Some funds have been set aside to assist indigent clients who need treatment
services; Pfeifer will provide these services in Bend, Redmond and La Pine
instead of just in Bend. Treatment will be provided to indigent sex offenders
and family violence offenders, and housing will be made available for indigent
offenders.
She pointed out that the Sheriff has the ability through the supervisory board to
move people from a hard bed to monitoring.
Mike Dugan asked if post-prison supervision is needed; if someone is revoked
by the Judge and gets an early release for whatever reason, he asked if they are
still supervised. Ms. Wanless said that supervision starts when the person is
released.
A breakdown of how the funds are used was explained. The numbers look
large because the budget is for two years. When comparing this budget to one
from a few years ago, about 40% is used for supervising offenders, similar to
previous years.
Ernie Mazorol observed that the dollar amount from the state doesn't seem
adequate for sex offender treatment. He said obviously there is more funding
coming from somewhere.
Ms. Wanless stated that most offenders are required to contribute money; some
funding is used to help offenders who are truly indigent. In most cases the
offenders are able to pay for treatment. It is important for these people to get
assistance right away.
Mike Maier stated that there are no County funds included. The Department of
Corrections is clear that Deschutes County is not providing funding.
At this time the members reviewed the funding parameters and Ms. Wanless
answered questions as appropriate.
Mike Dugan moved approval of the Plan; Andy Jordan seconded. The Plan was
unanimously approved by the group, and a recommendation for adoption will
be made to the Board of Commissioners.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 2 of 9 Pages
4. Presentation of Evidence-Based Practices.
Terry Chubb distributed information to the group, and explained that a
significant reduction in recidivism is the goal of utilizing evidence-based
practices. Data shows that 40% of individuals who are later known to be
serious offenders had committed their first crime by age 12. Evidence-based
practices is a way to track this information.
Non jail sanctions have been shown to be generally just as effective as jail,
especially if those sanctions include appropriate treatment. The Oregon
Department of Corrections reviewed information on 13,000 offenders over two
years, and the results of that study indicate those with jail sanctions have a
higher rate of being reconvicted.
For high-risk offenders, the rates are similar; if medium-risk offenders are
jailed, they show a higher rate of recidivism; and overall there is a higher rate of
recidivism if the individuals are jailed. Also, longer jail sentences do not
reduce the rate of future arrests.
What appears to work best is a solid range of sanctions, including jail,
rehabilitation, and treatment; the least restrictive form of sanctions should be
used if practical.
Mr. Chubb distributed a handout that compared the results of data on six
counties by the number of offenders sanctioned. The Deschutes County jail
sanction rate is comparatively low at about 110 sanctions per month.
There are four principles guiding this process: risk, need, responsibility, and
personal discretion. When supervision alone is used, there is a 75% failure rate
for high-risk offenders and 7% for low-risk offenders. With supervision and
treatment, the numbers are 33% for high-risk offenders and 14% for low risk
offenders.
Becky Wanless pointed out that treatment needs to be targeted to high- and
medium-risk offenders. However, high-, medium-, and low-risk offenders
cannot be mixed. The high-risk offender will negatively influence the others.
Judge Sullivan explained that efforts are made to refer offenders to the correct
program so they can get the help they need at an appropriate level. He added
that attempts are being made to educate local attorneys in this regard.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 3 of 9 Pages
Ms. Wanless stated that the Courts are good about not mandating an offender to
a particular program, and Parole and Probation is given some latitude to make
those decisions. It has been shown that some programs can actually increase
the recidivism rate for low-risk offenders. However, there are limited treatment
options available, and rather than mix low-risk offenders with the other, the
programs should be kept available to high-and medium-risk offenders.
Additionally, those offenders with steady employment and a stable address are
less likely to reoffend.
The responsibility principle is relevant to helping these offenders. These stages
are denial, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, and sometimes
relapse. These stages apply to everyday life as well. All treatment programs
are designed for the action stage. However, offenders need to be helped
through the other stages of change to get to that point. Change has to come
from the offender, not imposed on the offender.
Commissioner DeWolf noted that Senate Bill 267 requires a 25% mark or better
for recidivism. Ms. Wanless stated that her department should be at that level.
Mr. Chubb said that the consultants are doing well even though there is not
much funding available. Ms. Wanless added that meetings with providers are
held on a regular basis to make sure they are meeting the goals. Information is
shared with the Parole and Probation Officers and victims advocates.
5. Update on Status of State Budget Process.
Mike Maier indicated there is no report as no conclusions have been reached by
the Legislature at this time.
6. Discussion of 1145 Funding.
The Legislature is working on this issue as well. It is hoped the budget will
pass and programs won't have to be cut. Funding figures are being discussed,
including a lower figure that would allow for an opt-out scenario. Some
counties have already opted out, and others are contemplating it.
Mike Maier stated that if there are sufficient funds, the department will be
upside-down by at least $600,000 the second year. Services can't be sustained
at this level, and he feels the State needs to live up to its part of the bargain.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 4 of 9 Pages
Judge Sullivan added that funds are better directed and utilized at the local
level. If the opt-out happens, the State will be in control of the program again.
Jack Blum observed that that may be a good reason to not opt-out. Mike Dugan
replied that if there isn't adequate funding, the necessary programs won't be
available. Whether to opt-out is a Boards decision.
Tom DeWolf said that the State could absorb the work for two more counties.
Judge Sullivan stated that money for sanctions comes out of that funding, and it
is a very complex issue.
Ms. Wanless noted that there are complicated obligations, such as the fact that
the State won't pick up retirement benefits, and sick time and vacation time
have to be considered. Ernie Mazorol stated that the pros and cons of the best
case and worst case scenarios need to be reviewed. Mike Maier said that either
they will have the funding or they won't. If they don't, the program will be in
trouble by the second year and the third year will require at least a $1 million
subsidy.
Mike Dugan suggested that the 1145 opt-out discussion be postponed until it is
known what the Legislature finalizes. This should happen within the next thirty
days. Mike Maier emphasized that action needs to be taken as soon as the
numbers are known.
7. Discussion regarding Meth Action Coalition.
Tammy Baney said that the second meth summit was very successful, and over
300 people attended. There were at least sixty business people who attended
the part about the effect of meth use on the workplace. Judge Sullivan noted
that education is a significant part of the program.
8. Discussion regarding a Proposed Needle Exchange Program.
Dan Peddycord reminded the group that at the last meeting he advised that there
is interest in a program to help stop the spread of HIV and Hepatitis C. This
program ties into the Juvenile Community Justice Department's work and the
Meth Action Coalition's efforts. This program will target high-risk drug users.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 5 of 9 Pages
At this time there are about 25 cases of Hepatitis C each month; this will soon be
reportable. There used to be about one or two new HIV cases each year, but
recently there has been a 35% increase. The primary target audience for the
needle exchange program is those people who use meth or other illicit drugs. The
majority of meth users use dirty needles without thinking about the consequences.
Those dirty needles need to be taken out of the system. This program has been
shown to be positive in other areas. Since the users have to fact a health
professional, an unexpected side benefit is the reduction in IV drug use.
Shannon Danes pointed out that she recognized a burgeoning number of
Hepatitis C and HIV cases. She is from Canada, and their needles exchange
program is very accepted and successful. They are able to offer vaccinations,
screening and other services that help keep these individuals out of emergency
rooms. Many countries have this program in place, and research shows there is
a decrease in risky behaviors.
This program also helps to bridge the gap between those who are in treatment
programs and the underground drug users. It takes time to intervene, but many
people can be helped.
The Public Health Advisory Board and the Mental Health Advisory Board have
both endorsed the program based on research and success in other locations.
Mr. Peddycord said that there is some controversy, but it is clear that the
program does not enable IV drug use. It does allow some thoughtful
conversations regarding these concerns, backed up with good data and research.
It does not increase drug use or crime, but positively affects disease rates.
Mike Dugan added that he has discussed this with others, and feels it is not a
criminal law problem but instead a public health issue. He said he is
supportive, as the program has a tendency to reduce risk and criminal behavior
as well as the potential infection of other, non-IV drug users.
Becky Wanless stated that she supports the program as well. Approximately
five years ago her department began providing condoms; her staff was tired of
hearing offenders say that they were homeless but still had girlfriends, some of
whom ended up pregnant. If one of these pregnancies could be prevented, it is
worthwhile. There is no evidence that this program increased sexual behavior.
The same facts apply to the needle exchange program. She added that based on
available information, this is a win-win situation. The only potential negative is
that some people don't want the exchange program because they feel that this
somehow endorses the activities of the drug abuser.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 6 of 9 Pages
Dan Peddycord pointed out that there needs to be a component for treatment.
The needle exchange program would be based at treatment centers, or at various
Health or Mental Health Department locations.
Jack Blum said that the users may be scared off by this. Ms. Danes replied that
the stages of change are well-known, and these individuals can't be pushed into
something they aren't ready for. Contact needs to be "light", with the
relationship building up until the user is ready for further help. Some
individuals will eventually come to that point.
Andy Jordan stated that he hasn't polled his officers, but the program has been
highly successful in California, with no increase in crime but a positive effect
on health issues. His officers are exposed to drug users and needles regularly,
and he would like to see less risk to his officers. He added that personally the
cost of program is minimal and can potentially save taxpayers a lot of money.
Ms. Danes stated that it is very costly to treat even one person for Hepatitis C or
HIV; most of this expense is borne by the taxpayers.
After additional discussion, Commissioner DeWolf asked that LPSCC support
this program. Mike Dugan moved that LPSCC indicate support of the needle
exchange program; Andy Jordan seconded. Judge Sullivan stated that since this
is viewed as a public health issue and he cannot take a position, he will abstain.
However, if the group passes the motion, he will sign a support document as
Chair of LPSCC, not as Judge.
The group then unanimously indicated support of the program, with Judge
Sullivan abstaining. A letter from the Chair of LPSCC will be presented to the
Board of Commissioners to approve at an upcoming Board meeting.
9. Discussion regarding Hosting the Statewide LPSCC Conference (October
17).
Mike Stafford, Public Safety Coordinator, Oregon Criminal Justice
Commission indicated that he is interested in coordinating a statewide LPSCC
conference in Bend. The Governor has requested that LPSCC take a more
active position in public safety training and the development of policy.
Feedback on a statewide basis is being requested and compiled to be presented
to the Legislature in 2007.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 7 of 9 Pages
He feels the meth bills now in the Legislature will pass. He is tasked with
holding a grant process to increase the number of drug courts, which increases
the numbers of high- and medium-risk offenders being processed. Once a
committee has been selected, judges, District Attorneys and other professionals
will work on the particulars of the grant process.
A critical piece of the current legislation is the handling of sudafedrin products.
Last year through May the State had 60 HIDA drug lab seizures; this year the
number is 17. There has been a statewide reduction of at least 50% on average
in the number of drug labs.
Deschutes County had nine seizures last year but none this year. The program
is not as effective in the towns bordering other states, but the reduction is 50-
60% if you leave out those states. Efforts are being made to work with those
states on this issue.
Control of sudafedrin does not necessarily affect the "mom and pop"
operations, primarily just the labs. The State indicates that at least 50% of
children in foster care are a result of the labs. Until the mid-1990's, the formula
for meth was mostly controlled by prison gangs. Control was lost when it was
posted on the internet. It is more of a problem in rural areas and with biker
gangs. Mike Dugan added that meth is becoming a bigger problem in the East
in recent years as well.
Mr. Stafford indicated that the statewide conference is planned for Monday,
October 17 in the County building. There is a lot of interest and it is anticipated
that at least 100 people will attend. At this point the morning will be a group
session, with breakout groups meeting in the afternoon to focus on specific
issues. Mike Dugan and Tammy Baney indicated they will oversee the
workload associated with hosting the conference.
Mike Dugan moved approval of the conference date and location, and Jack
Blum seconded; the group gave its unanimous support.
10. Other Items.
None were offered.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 8 of 9 Pages
11. Items for the Next Meeting (August 1).
State budget issues, and specifically SB 1145 funding, will be discussed at the
next meeting.
Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
UL
Recording Secretary
Attachments
Exhibit A: Sign-in sheet (2 pages)
Exhibit B: Agenda (1 page)
Exhibit C: Proposed Community Corrections Plan (25 pages)
Exhibit D: Presentation: Effective Strategies in Offender Supervision (11 pages)
Exhibit E: Data regarding Sanctioned Offenders in Custody (3 pages)
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, July 11, 2005
Page 9 of 9 Pages
w
a
w
J
G.
O
O
N
r
r
_
~
`
d
L
O
A
1J
U
V
d
i
co
II
0
'
'w
v/
Q
w
J
a
to
0
0
N
r
~
C
C
U)
75
L
N
1
1
.
V
a~
c
a
=
V
~
z
co
a
N 4-4
~00
wa
N
C
C
O
m
C
~`~TES
ttJ Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
❑ < 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ore
MEETING AGENDA
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
3:30 P.M., MONDAY, JULY 11, 2005
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building, Second Floor
1300 NW Wall St.., Bend
1. Call to Order & Introductions - Mike Stafford, Public Safety Coordinator,
Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, plans to attend the meeting
2. Approval of Minutes of June 6, 2005 Meeting
3. Presentation of the 2005-07 Parole & Probation Biennial Community
Corrections Plan - Becky Wanless
4. Presentation of Evidence-Based Practices - Becky Wanless
5. Update on Status of State Budget Process
6. Discussion of 1145 Funding
7. Update regarding Meth Action Coalition - Hillary Saraceno
8. Discussion regarding a Proposed Needle Exchange Program - Dan Peddycord
9. Discussion regarding Hosting the Statewide LPSCC Conference (October 17)
10. Other Business
11. Items for the Next Meeting (August 1)
Exhibit
Page __I_ of I
Deschutes County
Parole and Probation
g4q*tr
Community Corrections Plan
July 1, 2005-June 30, 2007
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
Tom DeWolf, Chair
Michael M. Daly, Commissioner
Dennis R. Luke, Commissioner
Exhibit C
Page _ of 95
Table of Contents
Introduction
LPSCC Transmittal Letter
Commissioner's Resolution
Department Overview
Organizational Chart
Community Corrections Plan Cover Sheet
Supervision Program DE?scriptions
Supervision - Street Crimes
Supervision - Mental Health
Supervision - Sex Offender
Supervision - Batterer Intervention/Family Violence
Supervision - Intensive
Casebank
Other Program Descriptions
Administration
Presentence Reports
Substance Abuse Treatment:
Mental Health Assessment
Sex Offender Treatment
Batterer Intervention Treatment
Life Skills
Subsidy and Transitional Services
Community Based Custodial Alternatives
Community Service
Day Reporting
Electronic Monitoring
Violation Hearings
Deschutes County Corrections
Custodial and Sanction Beds; (Local Control Offenders)
Budget Information
Budget Summary
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Exhibit C
Page of 25
LPSCC Transmittal Letter
Exhibit C
Page of 25
Commissioner's Resolution
Exhibit C.
Page L~ of 2S
Department Overview
Deschutes County Parole and Probation is responsible for the supervision of all
felons and some misdemeanants residing in the county.
The mission of the department is to achieve sustained reductions in recidivism by
holding offenders accountable, facilitating pro-social thinking and behavior
change and collaborating with community partners in this endeavor. Our values
include integrity, honesty, and respect for one another and for offenders as well
as teamwork, tolerance, compassion and humor. Currently, we are embarking
on a significant change in the manner in which we work with offenders. In
conjunction with SB 267 and Evidence-Based Practices, we are in the midst of a
move from weekly office and duty days for parole and probation officers to an
appointment based system allowing supervising officers to spend additional time
with offenders in order to use Motivational Interviewing and other techniques to
move offenders from one stage of change to another.
Our department supervises over 1200 felony offenders and 175 family violence
and sexual offenders. Our three offices are strategically located at diverse
geographic sites throughout the county. Crime-specific caseloads (sex offender
and family violence), issue-specific caseloads (mental health and intensive
supervision), street crimes caseloads and a case bank have been created in
order to provide supervision and case management services to all types of
offenders as well as to each risk group.
Services, in addition to case management and supervision, include day reporting,
community service, life skills, employment assistance, subsidy and transitional
housing; community based custodial alternatives, jail and sanction beds and
electronic monitoring. In addition, the department contracts with community-
based counselors to provide therapy services for a variety of indigent offenders.
3
Exhibit
Page _S of, 25
COUNTY COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS
2005-2007 Community Corrections Plan Cover Sheet
Department of Corrections
For Office Use Only
2575 Center St. NE
Date Received:
Salem, OR 97310
Time Received:
County: Deschutes
Date:
6/27/2005
Address: 63360 Britta Street, Building #2
Bend, Oregon 97701
Telephone: (541) 385-3246
Fax: (541) 385-1804
E-mail: beckywa aeco.deschutes.or us
Community Corrections Director/Manager: Becky Wanless
Address: 63360 Britta Street, Bldg. #2, Bend, Oregon 97701
Telephone 541 383-4383 Fax: 541 385-1804
E-mail: beckywa@co.deschutes.or.us
Sheriff: Les Stiles
Address: 63333 Highway 20 West, Bend, Oregon 97701
Telephone 541 383-4393 Fax: 541 389-4454
E-mail: Istiles@co.deschutes.or.us
Jail Manager: Ruth Jenkin
Address: 63333 Highway 20 West, Bend, Oregon 97701
Telephone 541 388-6667 Fax: 541 330-9162
E-mail: ruthi@co.deschut2s.or.us
Supervisory Authority: Sheriff Les Stiles
Address: Same as above
Telephone Same as above Fax: Same as ab
ove E-mail: Same as above
LPSCC Contact: Judge Michael C. Sullivan
Address: 1164 Bond Street, Bend, Oregon 97701
Telephone (541) 388-5300 x 2410 Fax: (541) 388-5309
E-mail: Michael.C.Suilivan@ojd.state.or.us
BUDGET
State Grant-in-Aid Funds: $
6,843,086
County General Funds: $
Supervision Fees: $
431,000
Client Fees: $
272,100
Other Funds: $
300,000
Inmate Welfare Release Subsidy Funds $
20,000
TOTAL BUDGET: $
7,866,186
2005 - 2007 Cover Sheet
Exhibit 0
Page -1 of 25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Supervision - Street Crimes
Program Purpose: To provide probation, post-prison and parole supervision to felony
offenders who have committed street crimes.
Program Description: Assessment, supervision and case management services will be
provided to all felony offenders including those supervised under the terms of Interstate Compact.
Assessments will be completed in order to identify offenders' criminogenic risk factors.
Professional and certified parole and probation officers will provide treatment and resource
referrals, urinalysis testing, rewards and sanctions and will encourage offenders to move through
stages of change and access treatment, if appropriate, to alter thinking and behavior. In
conjunction with casework, information will be entered into various computer programs as required
by the Department, Deschutes County and DOC.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior, enforce Court and Board orders and to
assist offenders to change. Supervision will comply with department policies, Administrative Rules
and Oregon Law.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100;/0 of felony offenders convicted of street crimes will be
supervised in accordance with department mission, applicable policies, rules and laws.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
119 Probation
19 Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
450
❑ Local Control
Risk level
12L High ® Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
0 Men IN Women
Crime Category
K Felon ❑ Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
IS State Grant-in-Aid $ 1,367,301
❑ County General Fund $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 6
Exhibit C
Page _ of
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Supervision - Mental Health
Program Purpose: To provide probation, post-prison and parole supervision to felony and
misdemeanor offenders who are mental) ill.
Program Description: Assessment, supervision and case management services will be
provided using a team approach that combines the resources of a mental health therapist with a
parole/probation officer who has specialized skills and training in working with mentally ill
offenders. The therapist is able to work with offenders prior to their release from our county jail
and "bridge" services between incarceration and the community. This team will meet regularly in
order to staff cases, provide updates regarding medication and make decisions as to the
appropriate method of holding offenders accountable when a violation occurs. The department
facilitates enrollment of mentally ill offenders in the Oregon Health Plan, if eligible. A "fast track"
program through the District Attorney's office in conjunction with the Court is designed to speed
the legal process for mentally ill defendants. Review hearings are held to update the Court on
mentally ill offenders' compliance with probation conditions and their prescribed medication
regimen.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior, to enforce Court and Board orders, to
assist offenders to change and to provide reparation to victims.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of felony and misdemeanor offenders identified as having
significant mental health issues receive supervision and related services.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
19 Probation
CR Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
50
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
IR High ® Medium IR Low ❑ Limited
Gender
® Men 9 Women
Crime Category
19 Felon ® Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 105,177
❑ County General Fund $
Pq Other(other funds ) $ 105,177
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description
Exhibit C
Page q of 2r)
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Supervision - Sex Offender
Program Purpose: To provide probation, post-prison and parole supervision to felony and
misdemeanor offenders who have committed sex crimes.
Program Description: Assessment, supervision and case management services will be
provided utilizing a team approach, combining the resources of parole and probation officers,
treatment providers and polygraphers. The team convenes a monthly staffing and coordination
meeting and communicates daily as needed. Decisions regarding an offender's community
conduct are made as a team.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior, to enforce Court and Board orders, to
assist offenders to change and to provide reparation to victims.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 1000% of sex offenders under supervision in Deschutes County will
rceive specialized supervision and treatment.
SB 267 Eligible: X_ Yes No
Monthly Average to be
lrype of offender served:
Served:
19 Probation
IR Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
190
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
121 High 19 Medium 1K Low 3 Limited
Gender
50 Men K Women
Crime Category
W Felony 9 Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
* State Grant-in-Aid $ 368,119
❑ County General Fund $
® Other(Supervision/Client Fees_ ) $ 368,119
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 8
r-xnibrt L
Page I D of Q5
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Supervision - Batterer Intervention/Family Violence
Program Purpose: To provide probation, post-prison and parole supervision to felony and
misdemeanor offenders that have been convicted of family violence
offenses.
Program Description: Assessment, supervision and case management services will be provided
using a team approach, combining the efforts of parole and probation officers, therapists;
polygraphers and victim advocates. The team meets monthly to discuss supervision and
treatment protocol and to staff cases. Decisions regarding an offender's community conduct are
made as a team.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior, to enforce Court and Board orders, to
assist offenders to change and to provide reparation to victims.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of family violence offenders under supervision will receive
supervision and related services.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
0 Probation
Q Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
180
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
IR High ® Medium ® Low 0 Limited
Gender
IS Men ® Women
Crime Category
® Felon ®Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
ID State Grant-in-Aid $ 262,942
❑ County General Fund $
® Other(Supervision/Client Fees ) $ 262,942
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description
Exhibit G
Page 1\ of 2-5
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Supervision - Intensive
Program Purpose: To provide increased supervision to violent and resistant felony offenders.
Program Description: Violent offenders and/or those who have a history of resistive behavior
toward supervision and pose a high or medium risk to reoffend will receive intensive supervision
services. Offenders are subject to increased reporting requirements, curfew, more frequent home
and employment contacts and urinalysis testing using a "zero tolerance" approach. Parole and
probation staff supervising these offenders work in conjunction with law enforcement and
specialized narcotic teams.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior, to enforce Court and Board orders, to
assist offenders to change and to provide reparation to victims.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 75% of violent and/or resistive felony offenders will receive
intensive supervision.
SB 267 Eligible: _X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
151 Probation
131 Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
50
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
W High 14 Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
51 Men 64 Women
Crime Category
[ii Felon ❑ Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
12 State Grant-in-Aid $ 210,354
❑ County General Fund $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( ? $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( $
2005-2007 Program Description 10
Exhibit C.
_
Page 12. of 25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Casebank
Program Purpose: To monitor low and limited risk offenders.
Program Description: All low and limited risk offenders, with the exception of family violence
and sex offenders, will be assigned to case bank for the purpose of monitoring them for
compliance with conditions of supervision. When appropriate, given offenders' risk factors, they
may be referred to programs designed to assist them in changing.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior, to enforce Court and Board orders, to
assist offenders to change, if appropriate and to provide reparation to victims.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of low and limited risk offenders will receive monitoring
services.
SB 267 Eligible: _X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
[K Probation
C4 Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
❑ Local Control
540
Risk Level
❑ High ❑ Medium ® Low ® Limited
Gender
IN Men K Women
Crime Category
Felon ❑ Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
* State Grant-in-Aid $ 315,531
❑ County General Fund $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( j $
❑ Other( $
2005-2007 Program Description 11
Exhibit 01-
Page 1-3_ of 25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Administration
Program Purpose: To provide leadership and fiscal and organizational management
for the department.
Program Description: The (Director of Parole and Probation is responsible for the overall
management of the department. The Director reports to the Board of County Commissioners. 2.0
FTE Parole and Probation Program Managers are responsible for the daily supervision of staff
that provides direct services to offenders. An Administrative Manager oversees 3.5 FTE support
staff who provide support for parole and probation officers and who insure compliance with DOC
Administrative Rules related to admission, sentence computation, release and archiving.
Program Objectives: To provide leadership, policy development, financial oversight and
supervision of staff to insure compliance with department policy and procedure, Oregon
Administrative Rules, Oregon Revised Statutes and Intergovernmental Agreement with DOC.
Method(s) of Evaluation: Department operates in compliance with all requirements and within
budget.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served: N/A
Served:
❑ Probation
❑ Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
N/A
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
❑ High ❑ Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
❑ Men ❑ Women
Crime Category
❑ Felon ❑ Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
IN State Grant-in-Aid $ 646,593
❑ County General Fund $
13 Other(other funds ) $ 194,823
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 12
Exhibit
Page _qi of 2
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Presentence Reports
Program Purpose: To provide reports to the Court to assist in imposing appropriate
sentences and to provide background information to supervising officer.
Program Description: Following referral from the Court, a presentence report, utilizing a format
provided by the Department of Corrections, will be completed in conjunction with a defendant's
sentencing date. Criminal history, scope of crime, victim information, criminogenic risk factors, a
description of the defendant's readiness to change and application of Oregon Sentencing
Guidelines will be included in the report.
Program Objectives: Defendants will be sentenced in accordance with Oregon Sentencing
Guidelines and background information will be available to supervising officer upon offender's
release from custody.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of presentence reports requested by the Court will be
completed in an appropriate and time) manner.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
❑ Probation
❑ Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
3
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
R High W Medium f$ Low ® Limited
Gender
® Men ® Women
Crime Category
Felon Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 31,299
❑ County General Fund $
IR Other(Supervision/Client Fees ) $ 21,289
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 13
Exhibit C
Page_ Lof_ 5
PROGRAM DESCRIMON
Program Name: Substance-Abuse Treatment
Program Purpose: To provide alcohol and drug assessment and treatment services to high
and medium risk offenders who are indigent.
Program Description: Approximately 85% of offenders under our supervision struggle with
substance abuse addiction issues. Many of these offenders are indigent. and/or do not qualify for
Oregon Health Plan. For these high and medium risk offenders, services are available through a
local treatment provider with-whom the department contracts, Pfeifer and Associates.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior and to promote pro-social change.
Method(s) of Evaluation; 80°/6 of high and medium risk offenderswith-substance abuse
issues will receive assessment and treatment services.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
hype of offender served:
Served:
19 Probation
Ii6 Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
20
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
6d High ® Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
ED Men lA Women
Crime Category
51 Felony ER Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 12,000
❑ County General Fund $
ER Other(Supervision/Client Fees ) $ 12,000
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 14
Exhibit
Page /_25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Mental Health Assessment
Program Purpose: To allow medium and high riskoffenders to receive mental health
assessments.
Program Description: Indigent medium and high riskoffenders are often unable to access
mental health services on their own. A therapist with our local.mental health clinic will complete
assessments on offenders who qualify.
Program Objectives: To obtain mental health assessments on medium and high risk
offenders.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 75% of offenders requiring mental health assessments will receive
them.
SB 267 Eligible: _X_ Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type-of offender served:
Served:
® Probation
R Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
8
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
0 High 0 Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
- Men 0 Women
Crime Category
® Feton Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
14 State Grant-in-Aid $ 3750
❑ County General Fund $
Eg Other(Supervision/Client Fees ) $ 3750
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( I $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 15
Exhibit
Page J-7 of 25
_
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Sex Offender Treatment
Program Purpose: To allow indigent medium and high risk sex offenders to access
treatment services.
Program Description: Deschutes County sex offender treatment programs address sexual
assault cycles, thinking errors and defense mechanisms, victim empathy, victim clarification,
arousal control and reconditioning, social competence, development of healthy relationships and
reunification of family when applicable. Treatment groups meet weekly, in addition to individual
sessions as required. Each offender signs a contract delineating the requirements for compliance
to treatment. Offenders are required to submit to periodic polygraph testing by a private, licensed
polygrapher that is skilled and trained in testing sex offenders as an objective means of validating
behavior in the community and progress in treatment.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior and to promote pro-social change in sex
offenders.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 75% of indigent medium and high risk sex offenders will receive
treatment.
SIB 267 Eligible: _X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
F9 Probation
29 Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
8
❑ Local Control
Risk level
rid High IN Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
Q Men K Women
Crime Category
5t Felon IR Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 7500
❑ County General Fund $
® Other(Supervision/Client Fees_ $ 7500
❑ Other( $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 16
Exhibit
Page 1 18 of 25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Batterer Intervention Treatment
Program Purpose: To remove barriers for indigent batterers to access treatment services.
Program Description: Six therapists provide group and individual treatment services for indigent
batterers. Groups are a minimum of 48 weeks in duration in accordance with draft OAR's,
followed by at least 3 months of aftercare. Offenders are required to sign a treatment contract
outlining rules and expectations. Deschutes County Batterer Intervention Programs address the
tactics offenders use to justify battering behavior, increase the offenders' recognition of the
criminal aspect of their thoughts and behaviors, increase their-acceptance of personal
responsibility and accountability, increase their empathy and awareness of the impact their
behavior has on others, and help them identify how-they use alcohol and other drugs to support
their battering behavior. Treatment groups meet weekly, in addition to individual and couple
sessions as needed. Offenders are required to submit to disclosure and maintenance polygraph
examinations by a private, licensed polygrapher who is skilled and trained in testing batterers.
The polygraph is used as an objective means of validating behavior in the community and
progress in treatment.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior and to protect victims and the-community
by equipping offenders with the tools necessary to identify and eliminate battering behavior.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 75% of felony and misdemeanor indigent offenders identified as
batterers will enter treatment.
SIB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
® Probation
® Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
8
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
® High 9 Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
K Men ® Women
Crime Category
® Felony ® Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 5000
❑ County General Fund $
® Other(Supervision/Clien t Fees ) $ 5000
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 17
Exhibit
Page J- of 2.5
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Life Skills
Program Purpose: To provide offenders with basic life skills.
Program Description: Research reveals that when offenders are meaningfully employed and
earning a living wage, they are less likely to commit crimes. Life Skills provides a monthly class
for high and medium risk offenders that works toward teaching critical life skills including
employment retention, overcominca transportation issues, balancing family and work, and to think
in a "solutions" mode rather than "problems" mode. Life skills training also acts to reduce the
cycle of recidivism while supporting the reduction of individual and family poverty through
employment.
Program Objectives: To reduce criminal behavior and assist offenders to change.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 60% of high and medium risk offenders significantly lacking in life
skills will attend this training.
SIB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
C9 Probation
W Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
25
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
54 High ® Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
lit Men ® Women
Crime Category
151 Felony IN Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
❑ State Grant-in-Aid $
❑ County General Fund $
® Other(Supervision/Clien t Fees ) $ 2500
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 18
Exhibit C.
Page 20 of 25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Subsidy and Transitional Assistance
Program Purpose: To provide reintegration services to offenders being released from prison
or local control to the community in order to increase their opportunity for success in transitioning
from incarceration to the community.
Program Description: The integration of offenders into the community from a -custody
situation is enhanced when services are available to help them meet basic needs. Whenever
possible, transitional services will be initiated prior to release from incarceration and will be
available for a maximum of up to 60 days. Transitional services are the result of coordination
between jail program staff, prison counselors, mental health workers and parole and probation
officers. Some subsidy funds are available for those offenders who are not appropriate for
transitional housing. Assistance is available for lodging (18 beds for male offenders are available
on the first floor of the Parole and Probation Department), transportation, medication or other
needs relating to offender's potential for successful community integration. Offenders in
transitional housing are also offered employment and other services designed to enhance their
success in the community-
Program Objectives: To enhance offenders' opportunity for success in transitioning from
incarceration to the community and to increase community safety by providing pro-social housing.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 75% of offenders being released to our community without
appropriate housing will be provided with transitional housing and other services.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of -offender served:
Served:
0 Probation
® Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
21
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
® High ® Medium ❑ Low ❑ Limited
Gender
IN Men ® Women
Crime Category
ER Felony 10 Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 60,000
❑ County General Fund $
0 Other(Subsidy Funds ) $ 20,000
19 Other(Supervision/Client Fees ) $ 20,000
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 19
Exhibit C
Page 2J of 25
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Community Based Custodial Alternatives
Program Purpose: To provide alternatives to incarceration for felony and misdemeanor
offenders serving sentences of one year or less.
Program Description: The Deschutes County Supervisory Authority Board Administrative
Committee, appointed by the Deschutes County Sheriff, meets twice per month and reviews
inmates that have been sentenced to a term of incarceration of one year or less. Factors
considered in determining the appropriateness of an inmate being placed in a community-based
custodial alternative include the length of their sentence and the amount of time they have served,
their behavior within the facility, risk to the community, crime of conviction, prior criminal history,
amenability to alternative form of custody and the viability of the alternative custody plan. Upon
approval of the Administrative Committee (or full board, depending on circumstances), inmates
may be released from custody to complete their sentence in an alternative program. This may
include transitional leave, electronic monitoring, treatment, day reporting. Inmates are returned to
custody for violations. In no violations occur; inmates remain on their community-based custodial
alternative program until effective date of posWison supervision.
Program Objectives: To make maximum use of non-custody resources to hold inmates
accountable for their offenses.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of eligible inmates serving sentences of one year or,less will
be considered for community-based custodial alternatives and released, if appropriate.
SB 267 Eligible: _X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type. of offender served:
Served:
❑ Probation
54 Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
15
61 Local Control
Risk level
fig High ER Medium 1$ Low IS Limited
Gender
5a Men ® Women
Crime Category
N Felon IR Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 315,54-4
❑ County General Fund $
❑ Other(
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other $
2005-2007 Program Description 2U
Exhibit (2-
Page 22 of 2-5
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Violation Hearings
Program Purpose: To conduct parole, post-prison supervision and Interstate Compact
violation hearings and utilize structured sanctions or revocation to
address non-compliant behavior.
Program Description: In accordance with rules and laws, due process, including Notice of
Rights and hearings, when necessary, will be provided to felony offenders alleged to have violated
conditions of their supervision. A continuum of sanctions, ranging from community service to
electronic monitoring to jail, is available.
Program Objectives: To insure that statutory requirements are met and appropriate action is
taken, in accordance with the Sanction Effectiveness Study upon a positive finding that an offender
has violated a condition of supervision.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of felony offenders who allegedly violate their supervision
and request a hearing will receive due process.
SB 267 Eligible: _X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
❑ Probation
K Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
10
❑ Local Control
Risk Level
14 High M Medium IS Low 19 Limited
Gender
3 Men N Women
Crime Category
® Felony R Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
IR State Grant-in-Aid $ 52,588
❑ County General Fund $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 21
Exhibit C,
Page 23 of
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Program Name: Custodial and Sanction Beds
Program Purpose: To provide incarceration and secure program services for SB 1145
offenders, managed as local control at the county level, and offenders
serving sanctions of 31 or more days.
Program Description: Offenders sentenced to a term of imprisonment of one year or less,
as well as those serving sanctions of 31 plus days, will be housed in our adult jail- Offenders
serving these kinds of sentences; will be assessed upon admission to the jail and their needs
determined. During the period of their incarceration, they will be programmed for services
designed to reduce their risk to reoffend in accordance with their ability to comply with facility
rules, sentence length and program availability. Services available to offenders in custodial beds
include cognitive classes, anger management, family/parenting skills, AA, NA and GED classes.
Program Objectives: To hold offenders accountable, to reduce criminal behavior and to
assist offenders to change.
Method(s) of Evaluation: 100% of SIB 1145 inmates and offenders serving jail sanctions of
31 or more days will be booked into the Deschutes Count Jail.
SB 267 Eligible: X Yes No
Monthly Average to be
Type of offender served:
Served:
PS Probation
OR Parole / Post-Prison Supervision
65
29 Local Control
Risk Level
09 High OR Medium &9 Low IN Limited
Gender
51 Men M Women
Crime Category
01 Felon ❑ Misdemeanor
Funding Sources:
® State Grant-in-Aid $ 3,079,388
❑ County General Fund $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
❑ Other( ) $
2005-2007 Program Description 22
Exhibit L
Page 2~ of
County Community Corrections Budget Summary
2005-2007 Biennium
Community Corrections State Grant Funds
Program Name
State Grant Funds
Inmate Welfare
Release Subsidy
Fund
County/Other
Funds
Total
Supervision-Street Crimes
1,367,301
1,367,301
Supervision-Mental Health
105,177
105,177
210,354
Supervision-Sex Offenders
368,119
368,119
736,238
Supervision-Batterer/Family
Violence
262,942
262,942
525,884
Supervision-Intensive
210,354
210,354
Casebank
315,531
315,531
Administration
646,593
194,823
841,416
Presentence Reports
31,299
21,289
52,588
Subtance Abuse Treatment
12,000
12,000
24,000
Mental Health Assessment
3,750
3,750
7,500
Sex Offender Treatment
7,500
7,500
15,000
Batterer Intervention
Treatment
5,000
5,000
10,000
Life Skills
2,500
2,500
Subsidy and Transitional
Services
60,000
20,000
20,000
100,000
Community Based Custodial
Alternatives
315,544
315,544
Violation Hearings
52,588
52,588
Custodial and Sanction Beds
3,079,388
3,079,388
Fund Total
6,843,086
20,000
1,003,100
7,866,186
2005-2007 Budget Summary
23
Exhibit C
Page 25 of 25
Effective Strategies In
Offender Supervision
Deschutes County Adult Parole & Probation
Background
■ Our mission is to achieve sustained reductions
in recidivism.
■ Interventions within corrections are considered
effective when they reduce offender risk and
subsequent recidivism and therefore make a
positive long-term contribution to public safety.
What Are We Up Against?
Lifecourse studies indicate that:
■ By age 12, up to 40% of later serious offenders
have committed their first criminal act.
■ By age 14, up to 85% have committed their first
criminal act.
Exhibit
Page ( of f
What Are Evidence Based Practices?
■ Practices that are measurable and have a
definable outcome that are in accordance
with practical realities.
Overview of What Works?
■ Study size: 53,614 offenders.
■ Treatment added to supervision produced
reductions in recidivism of 10%.
■ Non-jail sanctions were just as effective in
reducing recidivism as jail sanctions.
Overview of What Works?
■ Brief periods of incarceration are as effective at
reducing new violations as more costly
prolonged detention.
■ Recidivism following a community service
sanction is no higher than recidivism following a
jail sanction.
2
Exhibit
Page --S?- of
Conclusion of What Works?
■ Treatment and rehabilitation are more likely to
be successful than surveillance and enforcement.
■ Non-jail sanctions that involve an appropriate
treatment component should be more effective
at reducing recidivism than jail sanctions.
Oregon Review
■ Study included all offenders (regardless of crime
of conviction or risk score) receiving their first-
ever sanction between 01/01/99 and 12/31/01.
■ Offenders were studied for 12 months following
the sanction.
■ The study group totaled 13,219 offenders from
throughout Oregon.
Oregon Review
■ For all crime and risk groups, the reconviction
rate is higher following a jail sanction than it is
following a non-jail sanction.
■ All offenders receiving community sanctions
have lower rates of reconviction than those that
received a jail sanction.
■ Work crew/community service has the lowest
rates of reconviction for all high/medium risk
offenders (10%).
3
Exhibit L?
Page _ of _JJ
-
Oregon Review
■ All high-risk offenders have similar rates of
reconviction no matter how long they are in jail.
■ For all medium-risk offenders, the longer the jail
stay, the higher the rate of recidivism following
jail.
■ For all crime types, longer jail stays are
associated with higher rates of recidivism
following the jail sanction.
Oregon Review
■ Violating Supervision Conditions: There is no
clear pattern relating length of jail stay to rates
of subsequent violations or future compliance.
In other words, longer jail stays do not result
in better compliance than shorter jail stays.
■ Rearrest Rates: There is no pattern relating
length of jail stay to rates of rearrest. In other
words, longer jail terms do not reduce future
arrests more than shorter ones.
Oregon Review Recommendations
■ There needs to be a range of sanctions including
but not limited to jail to be both effective and
cost-effective in response to violations.
■ To reduce recidivism over the long term, the
response to violations should also include
services aimed at rehabilitation.
■ Use community service/work crew whenever
appropriate as this has the lowest rates of
reconviction.
4
Exhibit
Page _A of
Oregon Review Recommendations
■ Review length of stay in jail and adjust to
improve the cost-effectiveness of this, the most
expensive sanction.
■ Shorter jail stays cost less than longer ones and
have the same or better results in terms of
recidivism.
Oregon Review Summary
■ Jail is most often the preferred setting for providing
both incapacitation and punishment.
■ The analysis shows that longer jail stays either have no
effect on recidivism or result in increasing recidivism.
■ Length of a jail sanction does not affect either future
compliance or future arrest.
■ It would appear that carrying out the function of
punishment and incapacitation with shorter jail
sanctions could be accomplished without putting the
public at greater risk.
Percentage of Total Caseload in
Custody Serving a Jail Sanction
5
Exhibit D
Page r-5 of 11
Dec Feb April June
The Four Driving Principles
The Essence of Effective Behavioral Intervention
■ The Risk Principle
■ The Need Principle
■ The Responsivity Principle
■ The Principle of Professional Discretion
The Risk Principle
■ Risk of recidivism can be predicted by using
statistically validated tools such as the LSCMI.
■ The determination of risk is essential for
program assignment.
Effect of Treatment
Supervision vs. Supervision With Treatment
m u
to w
60 y
~ ■ Weh Wd ■ toes Poi
b VIeGYleer+ 10 PnlYbnw
a team is etw to.e
~ rreu.nm.. iryeeMbwe
ao to
to o
e o
-High risk probationers do very well with treatment while low risk probationers
become more criminally active.
6
Exhibit
Page _LQ - of I k
Probability of Recidivism by Treatment Program for High-
Risk Offenders
40
Reduction in Recidivism 30
20
10
0
-10
-20
Increases in Recidivism
40
d0
-Most creaanrnt programs showed reductions in recidivism for tltis group.
-Fight programs had reductions of 20%.
Probability of Recidivism by Treatment Program for Low-
Risk Offenders
10
Reduction in recidivism 5
0
.5
-00 X
.15
.20
Increau in recidivism -25
-30
-35
-40
-The majority of programs wen associated with increases in the f duce rites for 1 -risk offrn&.
-The best program only reduced recidivism by 9%.
Problems With Mixed Risk
Offenders
■ In the previous charts, treatment programs KK and
MM each reduced recidivism for high-risk offenders by
over 30%.
■ Program MM increased recidivism for low-risk
offenders by 7% and Program KK by 29%.
■ Thus, the same programs that reduced recidivism for
higher-risk offender actually increased it for low-risk
offenders.
■ Intensive supervision reduces recidivism for higher-risk
offenders but increases the recidivism rates of lower-
risk offenders.
7
Exhibit
Page _:a_~ of
Why Match Offenders With
Programs?
Average recidivism reduction/gain...
■ Inappropriate treatment increases recidivism by
6%.
■ Overall average for treatment is a reduction in
recidivism by 13%.
■ Appropriate treatment reduced recidivism by
30%.
The Need Principle
By assessing and targeting criminogenic needs for change, agencies can
reduce the probability of recidivism.
Criminogenic Factors
■ Anti-social attitudes
■ Anti-social friends
■ Substance abuse
■ Lack of empathy
■ Impulsive behavior
Non-Criminogenic Factors
■ Anxiety
■ Low self esteem
■ Creative abilities
■ Medical needs
■ Physical conditioning
Targeting Criminogenic Needs
Results from Meta-Analyses
035
Reduction in -hviun 03
0.Tb
02
0.15
0.1
0.05
Inc¢sse in ackhvism
-0,OS
Target 71 non- Target 4-6
criminogenic nods cominogenic needs
souse: Gmdmau, F-d,, and Taylor
8
Exhibit D
Page of
Why Focus On Needs?
■ Each day of employment reduces arrests by 1%.
■ The probability of arrest increases by 25% with
each address change.
■ And these are not in the top five of the list of
criminogenic factors.
The Responsivity Principle
■ Deliver interventions in a style and mode that is
consistent with the ability and learning style of
the offender.
■ Identify where the offender is in the Stages of
Change.
■ Use techniques such as Motivational
Interviewing to assist offenders in moving along
the Stages of Change.
Stages of Change
■ Pre-contemplation: Denial, no
acknowledgement of the existence of a problem.
■ Contemplation: Ambivalent about change.
■ Preparation: Increased conunitment and change
becomes a priority.
■ Action: Strategies for change are chosen and
pursued.
■ Maintenance: Sustaining new habits.
■ Relapse: Sanction, and start over.
9
Exhibit D
Page g_ of
Motivational Interviewing
■ Express Empathy: Acceptance facilitates change and
skillful reflective listening is fundamental.
■ Develop Discrepancy: Discrepancy between current
behavior and important goals motivates change.
■ Roll with Resistance: Solutions are evoked, not
imposed. Resistance is a signal to change strategies.
■ Support Self-Efficacy: Belief in the possibility of
change is an important motivator.
The Principle of Professional
Discretion
■ No assessment tool, no matter how
sophisticated, can or should replace a qualified
practitioner's professional judgment.
■ In certain instances, only human judgment can
integrate and make the necessary subtle
distinctions to adequately recognize and
reinforce moral or behavioral progress.
Time to Change
■ We now know more about criminal risk, needs,
and responsivity than ever before.
■ Risk to recidivate can be predicted using
statistically validated tools such as the LSCMI.
■ To achieve sustained reductions in recidivism,
we must target 4+ criminogenic needs.
■ Lasting change must be evoked from the
offender, not imposed upon the offender.
10
Exhibit D
Page of
An Evidence Based
Approach to Effective Supervision
■ Risk Management (low risk offenders)
Involves providing least restrictive, most appropriate sanctions and
supervision.
■ Risk Reduction (moderate-high risk offenders)
Involves detemuning ceiminogenic needs and reducing risk factors through
effective intervention and appropriate sanctions.
■ Risk Control (extreme high risk offenders)
Involves techniques that control risk of reoffending while under
correctional authority.
11
Exhibit 7
Page k` of
Percentage of Sanction Eligible Offenders in Custody Serving Jail Sanction
Dec '04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
Clackamas
# of sanction eligible offenders
1636
1660
1684
1708
1732
1757
1746
# of jail beds
1993
1866
1756
2318
2289
1514
2558
.Average Dail Population
65.344
61.18
57.574
76
75.0492
49.639
83.86885
of office serving ail sanction
3.99%
3.69%
3.42%
4.45%
4.33%
2.83%
4.80%
Dec '04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
Deschutes
# of sanction eligible offenders
1313
1328
1341
1381
1423
1416
1422
# of jail beds
1469
987
1027
1800
1286
1445
1406
Average Dail Population
48.164
32.361
33.672
59.01639
42.1639
47.377
46.09836
of office serving ail sanction
3.67%
2.44%
2.51%1
4.27%
2.96%
3.35%
3.24%
Dec'04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
Douglas
# of sanction eligible offenders
1028
1017
1006
995
984
974
980
# of jail beds
1608
1388
1685
1811
2428
1665
1748
Average Dail Population
52.721
45.508
55.246
59.37705
79.6066
54.59
57.31148
r/o of office serving ail sanction
5.13%
4.47%
5.49%
5.970/61
8.09%1
5.60%
5.85%
Dec '04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
Linn
# of sanction eligible offenders
1189
1181
1173
1165
1157
1148
1164
# of jail beds
1227
1343
1515
1655
964
1899
1067
,Average Dail Population
40.23
44.033
49.672
54.2623
31.6066
62.262
34.98361
r/o of office serving ail sanction
3.38%
3.73%
4.23%
4.66%
2.73%
5.42%
3.01 %
Dec '04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
CODs
# of sanction eligible offenders
562
557
552
547
542
537
553
# of jail beds
952
998
969
843
1265
1262
1036
Average Dail Population
31.213
32.721
31.77
27.63934
41.4754
41.377
33.96721
of office serving ail sanction
5.55%
5.87%
5.76%
5.05%
7.65%
7.71%1
6.14%
Dec '04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
Jackson
# of sanction eligible offenders
1847
1860
1873
1886
1899
1913
1906
# of jail beds
3527
3790
2814
5360
3294
3042
3415
,Average Dail Population
115.64
124.26
92.262
175.7377
108
99.738
111.9672
of office serving ail sanction
6.26%
6.68%
4.93%
9.32%
5.69%
5.21 %
5.87%
Dec '04
Jan '05
Feb '05
March '05
Aril '05
Ma '05
June '05
Clackamas
3.99%
3.69%
3.42%
4.45%
4.33%
2.83%
4.80%
Deschutes
3.67%
2.44%
2.51%
4.27%
2.96%
3.35%
3.24%
Douglas
5.13%
4.47%
5.49%
5.97%
8.09%
5.60%
5.85%
Linn
3.38%
3.73%
4.23%
4.66%
2.73%
5.42%
3.01
Coos
5.55%
5.87%
5.76%
5.05%
7.65%
7.71%1
6.14%
Jackson
6.26%
6.68%
4.93%
9.32%
5.69%
5.21%
5
Note: Offender population interpolated from 12/04 to 04/05 for Clack, Doug, Linn, Coos & Jack Co's.
Dec '04 to June '05 averages: Clack-3.93%, Desc-3.21 Doug-5.8%, Linn-3.88%, Coos-6.28%, Jack-6.28%
7/11/2005
r I
0
4"
X
W a
CAD
a•
o 0)
~n
i
V
C
y
W
N
0
.N
N
V
R
y
N
m
R
r
0
0
L
a
w
c0
U)
E
co
-
w
c0
c
O
_Ile
L
cn
CU
0
O C
O
0
0
0
0 ::i
U
- )
■
❑ ❑
■
El
w..
Y
' , w y r~s
4fi
i
y'
r
~
~
YY
~
'
7~~
~
I~
i
.
i•
1:
a.
~
~
_ h 1'4P I~_
3
uY'
I
,
K
Fes';
I:
w
r
f'
a -
r
_
V. 3"- ~~rte
z
M!_~
I
NIII Al
W-ROMM
i
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O
O O 00 cfl V) ~T M N O
r
In
O
(D
C
7
0
O
a
cu
2
Y!
O
Q
LO
O
L
f0
NE~
U)
O
L
N
LL
L(~
O
C
c6
U
O
7-7
b b7
as
o
c,
0 1
^V
Y
V/
C1
A~
W
N
0
N
7
V
A~
W
d•+
L
a
LO
P LLB
0
0
o
-C °
0
0 ~ LOL Q
^
rl
r
jai
v=+. `f
i
f
n
-
k
- I
t
. K'L'.i.
I
I
- r r, y: ~ , r
N
ti
v ~
3
-mw
-
y
+Y
I
I
I
'
M
i
O
0
O O
o a
O O O O
~ o o ~
-0-O -0-O
O
~
O
o
0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
O
0 co
(O m m N
O
C
O
Y
U
N
O
O
U
C
C
J
N
0
0
N
7
U
0
w
(o
(o
Y
U
co
U