2006-176-Minutes for Meeting February 06,2006 Recorded 3/2/2006DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS CJ 7406'116
NANCY BLANKENSHIP, CLERK
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNALNTY 0310213006 03;59;19 PM
I IIIIIIIIIIiIII
II II III I IIII
20-ib
DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK
CERTIFICATE PAGE
This page must be included
if document is re-recorded.
Do Not remove from original document.
1`STEg C
G
tug 2A
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF MEETING
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2006
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building, Second Floor - 1300 NW Wall St..., Bend
Present were Judge Michael Sullivan; Commissioner Bev Clarno; Court
Administrator Ernie Mazorol; Jack Blum, citizen member; Hillary Saraceno,
Commission on Children & Families; and Becky Wanless, Parole & Probation
Department.
Also in attendance were Jacques DeKalb, defense attorney; Captain Marc Mills,
Sheriffs Office; Mike Dugan, District Attorney; Roger Olson, NAMI; Bob Smit
and Elaine Knobbs, KIDS Center; Scott Johnson, Mental Health Department; and
Sgt. Tom Kipp, Oregon State Police.
Also present were media representative Cindy Powers from The Bend Bulletin; and
citizen Rick Treleaven.
1. Call to Order & Introductions.
The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m., at which time the attendees
introduced themselves.
2. Approval of Minutes of February 6, 2006 Meeting.
Mike Dugan moved approval and Bob Smit seconded. The minutes were
unanimously approved.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 1 of 8 Pages
3. Discussion of February 13th Department of Corrections Presentation
regarding Treatment and Sentencing Options.
Mike Dugan stated that the discussion on treatment and sentencing options is
scheduled for one week from today, on February 13th from 1:00 - 4:30. Scott
Taylor with the Department of Corrections will give a presentation on what
happens when sentencing someone to prison. This will be the first regional
training.
The class is free, but for a $40.00 fee an attendee can get continuing education
credits. Possible attendees will be from Crook County, Malheur County,
Jefferson County, Deschutes County Parole & Probation Department,
Deschutes County District Attorney's Office, and members from Jacques
DeKalb's office. The Judges are invited also.
Becky Wanless said that they do not get treatment. Of the 13,000 adult
offenders, 200 get treatment. There are limitations on who qualifies and if they
qualify they are then closed out of alternative programs. The District
Attorney's office is upset that less than 1% gets out earlier than expected.
Judge Sullivan stated that he was concerned about the alternative treatment and
would like to explore if there are more treatment beds available. He proposed
that the group have a mission statement on what they want. A Jail Alternatives
subcommittee was elected: Commissioner Clamo, Scott Johnson, Becky
Wanless, Roger Olson, and Ernie Mazorol. The committee will prepare a
mission statement between now and the next meeting.
4. Presentation of "Darkness 2 Light", the Tri-County Child Sexual Abuse
Prevention Program.
Bob Smit said that there is now a shift from where we have been. Children are
protecting children and with this program we are moving that to adults
protecting children. Adults prevent child abuse. Mr. Smit introduced Elaine
Knobbs, the KIDS Center Director, who is here today to give a presentation of
the program.
Elaine Knobbs said that the goal for the Tri-County Darkness to Light Initiative
is to reduce child sexual abuse in Central Oregon using evidence-based
trainings, targeted outreach material and a targeted media campaign.
She further stated the objectives of the program are:
inuiumb of meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 2 of 8 Pages
1. To teach the "Darkness to Light: curriculum to approximately 8,700 of
the adults living in Central Oregon, with 6,500 (about 5%) trained in the
first two years. This curriculum teaches adults to prevent, recognize and
react responsibly to child sexual abuse.
2. To raise the awareness of child sexual abuse in a significant percentage
of the general population.
3. To create an on-going, self-sustaining program activity level by the end
of year four.
Activities and strategies will include:
1. "Darkness to Light - Stewards of Children" training curriculum for
adults, including a booklet, videotape and interactive workbook.
Targeted groups include youth agencies, churches, parenting groups,
medical providers, teachers and the general public.
2. Outreach materials for community centers, social service agencies and
schools.
3. Facilitator materials for 16 adults from a base of volunteers and agency
partners : Crook County Health Department, Deschutes County Heath
Department, Jefferson County Public Health Department, Crook County
Juvenile Department, Deschutes County Juvenile Community Justice
Department, Jefferson County Community Justice Department, Jefferson
County District Attorney's Office, Central Oregon Battering and Rape
alliance )COBRA), and KIDS Center.
4. A media campaign throughout Central Oregon, with sexual abuse
prevention messages suitable for television, radio, print and billboards.
The timeline is a four year endeavor starting in January 2006, with a
concentrated and intensive focus during the first two years, and tapering to
self-sustaining point by 2009.
The benefits of the initiative will help protect Central Oregon's approximately
65,000 children from the trauma of sexual abuse. National research indicates
that for every on adult trained in the "Darkness to Light" child sexual abuse
prevention curriculum, 10 children are better protected from abuse.
Ms. Knobbs passed out the "7 Steps to protecting our children" booklet (a copy
is attached as Exhibit B). Booklets are available at the community centers,
Bend PD, and various agency offices.
Bob Smit said that Carol Leyman did the kickoff last week at the Bend Library.
There were almost 75 people that attended. The Madras High School students,
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 3 of 8 Pages
as a project, are going to produce a movie about child abuse and what it is like
going through it. The community is ready and wants to discuss it. The City of
Atlantis wants to use this program as a model.
Ms. Knobbs showed a video and a Power Point presentation. (Copy of the
Power Point presentation is attached as Exhibit C.)
Mr. Smit said that they want LPSCC members to be aware of what they are
doing. They are seeking grants from agencies and foundations to help support
the project. Ms. Knobbs said that they are interested in getting as many
partners as possible trained and any staff person can be sent to training.
Judge Sullivan stated that we could have pre authorization for the Chair to sign
a letter of support from LSPCC as the KIDS Center applies for grants.
MAZOROL: Move approval of authorization for the Chair to approve and sign
the letter of support from LPSCC.
SMIT: Second.
The vote was unanimously in favor.
5. Discussion of Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program.
Mike Dugan said that 5 or 6 months ago criminal justice staff was here for a
Statewide Regional LPSCC Conference. The following two grants were
discussed at that meeting and last week an announcement was made about the
grants as outlined below:
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program - An interagency
case management, addiction treatment, and mental health care program
related to essential services for a drug court and/or dependency court for
supervised parenting and pregnant methamphetamine-using women and
their children.
It is a 2 year grant program with 25% cash match. There are a total of ten
grants available for $150,000.00 per year. It will be a total of 3 million
dollars over a 2 year period. The grant is renewable based on adherence
to grant plans and must have a funding continuation plan. The program
is directed primarily to drug affected women and their children.
minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 4 of 8 Pages
2. Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program - Funding
for drug court coordinators and drug court supervised addition treatment
to support the implementation of new drug courts and the enhancement
of existing drug courts serving adult, juveniles and families.
It is a 2.5 million dollar grant for a 1 year plan with no cash match.
Maximum grant is $300,000.00; only 10 grants will be awarded and must
have a funding continuation plan. The program is directed to enhance or
implement drug court and must address the 10 key components to a drug
court.
The deadlines for the grants are coming up (a copy of the grant information is
attached as Exhibit D.) February 28th is the deadline for letter of interest and
April 3rd is the application deadline.
Tom Kipp asked if the 97 corridor was tied into the Byrne grant. Mr. Dugan
said that there were no limitations on what the grant is tied to.
Mr. Mazorol said that a group of 6 to 8 people are working on putting the
budget together. They will put together how the money will be used. He said
that Judith Ure in the Commissioners office is writing the grant for the County.
Scott Johnson said that in the prelim budget one half of the money will be for
treatment. They are requesting $450,000.00. He said thus far it is Mental
Health's intention to look for one of their agencies, such as Serenity Lane or
Piefer, to contract out the bulk of the work to.
Judge Sullivan said he thinks it is a good program and that it is important to
have drug court. The courts could have more money directed at a group where
they think they are doing the best, such as families with children.
DUGAN: Move approval for the Chair to have authority to sign a letter of
support for the application for the Byrne Methamphetamine
Reduction and Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Programs.
SMIT: Second.
The vote was unanimously in favor.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 5 of 8 Pages
6. Update regarding Family Drug Court Proposal
Commissioner Clarno said that Greg Walden said that anything his office can
do to let him know. Judge Sullivan asked Scott Johnson to think about that and
bring it up Thursday. Commissioner Clarno said she will call him back and get
more details.
Scott Johnson said that we are the largest community in Oregon that does not
have a drug court. Judge Sullivan stated that we do have family court. Ernie
Mazorol said that of the 4 counties with family court, ours is the most
comprehensive. Judge Sullivan said that they can't do it without community
support.
Cindy Powers with the Bulletin said that she will be looking at other counties
that have communities of similar size and the paper will be doing an article.
7. Discussion of Sheriffs Levy, Proposed Jail Expansion and Programming
Needs.
Scott Johnson said that when doing the jail expansion development the
programming needs were looked at also. He said that the programming needs
were covered.
Judge Sullivan said that it was in the Commissioners hands and that the
proposal was well received. He said that Larry Blanton worked very hard on
the jail assessment needs committee.
8. Update regarding Dedicated Courthouse Parking for Law Enforcement
Personnel.
Judge Sullivan said that they hoped to get dedicated parking in front of the
courthouse as parking has become an issue and marked units need to have
marked parking spaces. This will serve both courthouse protection and gives
the officer the ability to come and leave more easily.
Ernie Mazorol stated that Andy Jordan has been working on the parking issue
with the parking committee. Chief Jordan was not able to attend today and
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 6 of 8 Pages
bring his information to LPSCC members. So, we will need to cover this topic
further when he is available.
9. Other Business and Items for the Next Meeting (March 6).
Scott Johnson stated that he will have the 07-09 Mental Health bi-annum plan
ready to bring before the LPSCC members next month. Judge Sullivan asked
that the review be put on the next meeting's agenda.
This item will be discussed further at the March 6 LPSCC meeting.
Tom Kipp said for the next meeting he would like to discuss misdemeanor sex
offenders who are adjudicated to be monitored. Judge Sullivan stated that
Parole & Probation has 300 more felony filings. There is no money for
misdemeanor probation and there are issues about who is the most significant or
biggest risk group. They supervise as many people as they can. Jacques
DeKalb said there has been a 20% increase.
Sgt. Kipp stated that P & P does not have the funds nor do they have the
enforcement leverage as a probation officer. He brought up sex offender
treatment and sex offender registration and the need to discuss how they can be
monitored and what action can be taken.
Mike Dugan asked that these names be furnished to the patrol officers as a
community safety issue. Judge Sullivan asked for a report from Becky Wanless
at the next meeting about resources.
This item will be discussed further at the March 6 LPSCC meeting.
Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at S: 00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Recording Secretary
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 7 of 8 Pages
Attachments
Exhibit A: Sign-in sheet (1 page)
Exhibit B: "Darkness to Light -7 Steps to protecting our children" (9 pages)
Exhibit C: "Darkness to Light" - Power Point presentation (10 pages)
Exhibit D: Information on Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction and Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement Grant Programs (46 pages)
Exhibit E: Agenda (1 page)
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, February 6, 2006
Page 8 of 8 Pages
(N
(D
c
O
S
(D
X
CD
n
O
a
cn
CD
v
CD
0
I
J
z
Oa
vl
m
W
1
d
L
r_
r
D
I
a
N
y
v
24,
0
Q'
Q
q
A
°
4-1
W
N
CN
~
1
~
~
0~
~
Q?
W
b 0
~
<N
W
~
~
~
C~
oQ
op
3
O
~
J
~
p
~
N
4
G
1
w
1
V
I
W
o
O
N
oa
w
6-
I_ 1 ~
r%l
r
p~
s ~
n
0
~6'
IF y
i v
i
~ E yF ~f~nr
kz a
O
0 Cf)
r---~-
C/) M
(B -D r
o CD
cf)
V) CD
C)7 r+ 0
~D , CfD
n
orq
Iz, C0 zr
CO
0
k~
Q
X
CD
CT
oE
C(D
g.
N CD s D N O x>
a . Q to c ~
Cf) CD
cr - (1) CD CD
=r CD U) o Cn Cn N
o a c Cn o -cc •a m
CD cr ;7.: 0
CC/) (D CD N CND CCD O v v c N• < p' O n ca
N N c U = O(3 m = O N CD " O to _
0 0- CD
CL C)
`m <v CD o_ cp v C Co c (n CD 0
c cQ I a- 0, "a CD CD =r * 0 O CD (n CD U) (rn~~ J
C) "O O co O sy O •J = O x ` V
N XD CL
(D
ON ~ D m m x Ca o o ° CAD o° C/D
o m r Cn rn- -p C3 c CD O p> x
N 7C m p `C tv O n n 7 ! v)
CD -0 a• b CD 7 •O S a S.D.
cn CD N cn CD O O CD O CAD 0) 0 0 s
w y ° (n B CL
can o < ° - a 07
°oC7~ O 73 a C°.~~ o in ° j 0
D o(0 ~m r p c - C= ° CT n N. O
co CD in N- Ma~ Q (c cr
t
S O cr Cn CD
CD ,
CL CD Cl) CD O 0 0 =3 0- CD O 0 N a p CD O
n) ft =r CD O O= CD cn =3
N -a n O O -
° O M =r =1
O 9
P :5. cn C n« cn- :3 O `y~ O CQ
az CD
CD =r @ 3
CD W
m O
c- 'O O ti .n-. U) N
ch -0 C/) CC
73 N 7 c c - CA c O.
c .,,C O c n> CD
o Cn' N 0 0 ID O
CD =3 K
y w N N X =3 E; c j
7
I
w
a n w m N o Cn Cs ` !k
ca Q° m° p m° 3 0 3 - ¢ a o It+
cn = m 0 m Q-
m o CD c~ v yo CD CA ; / J
< o E-r m =r =3 Cn 0 En
CD ~ -0 ::r CD U) CD
CD CD C S X C O ?
O ~ y' go (D PL) • V C~ F0~ l J L LJ
o =r
O C O 7 c yr v CD = CD N _
Cr o (Q v Q cD W
;:w CD Pi
CD ZT ELI< CL CD
w _
N C. c ==Q~=_ o w m C) CD
ca- VOi O a_ Q f°n h" J FT F~ X J
V / AA)'
it O N O O Cn ■ N
3 G') ~ U) A) CD CS CD O c.) Pi
_
o ~ Q fl tv `G o a O{ V . CD VZ D
W 3 v CD Q Cep N N n V F.r m y
0 cl :3 =3
(O CD CAD C")
Cf)
O ' D U
CCnn n. 7 CD Er' `C r~ CS O Vs e O
CD U) c CD Cn O v N
ct N m p `G Cr O CD CD
CD CD n W ( -j ( r-+ 10
n C) (D N) m
V I O CD O r 1
C N ;M CD O C CD O O O O E-T
Cep n ~D ~ (Q (1) ° c =
C. Q cc n m
1-+ v En
o(o
CD - cn CD =r
CD =r w I
rn m o o' m CC cND= n X°° o
0 CD CD
w w 0) CD
COD =or 0-
Cc cn CD
' Cn CD Cn
~r
to Ov N
Z~-
O CO
CD
O O 1G
Cl)
O O
O o
N
0
N
G
O O
O
~
a'
n_ O
0-
n_
m
N U)
ZT
p C-)
Cn• m CD
~
7
cn
-
a
=3
3
En
O
"t3
O
CD
O
O_
a m
CCD
0
O
3 O
CD
c
o
n m
O CD °
N
C co
Q
a
CD CD O
= CD 70
O
CD
D
CD
@ ~
M
a
3
m -
C
CC
n
O
M
5-0
cn
C
Cl)
Cn
CD
m
C° -0 o
CD
c
O c
U 0
o
CD
-
O O. O
w
(n
CD
Ca =3
O -a O
cz
O
n n Cp
S
o O
:3
on 0_
c
cr
0
v
CD
CD n
3 O
_
o CS
o- CD
nni m
C2
o CD
C.0
CD
o
ccn <
CD C-)
5
cn
5Kp
tj 0
a ~
A)
tj
90
V ~
v
v
En
0
(D
0
H
S
CD
CD
Q
v
cCD
CD
O
CD
00
m
tz
O
X
C
N
v
is
C
CD
CD
N-
CD
m
N
ti
0
n
O O
v
O
~ o
Q O
CD m
M m
C0-0
CD O
V Q
Q x
c v
ca.
CD v
C
cn
n
C
Q-
:3
CC
N
cn
cn
a~
C
(n
0
v
n_
c
cn
0
n
n
w
w
~ H
C+
H3
w
H
0
0
Fr-'
P
0
9)
~v
(D
tj
P.
tj
cr
CD
O' fA
co
su (a
r =r
U
r.L
•G
S
fu
O
C
cO
G
O
n
CL
S
O
S
D)
N
Cr
CD
CD
O
4
U)
0
to
V
CD
H
~
~
TA
V/
1
It+
v F-I~
lo
(D
F-J
(D
(D
Y
F"J
0
F-'
(D
V'i•
0
P
•
0
CD
w
w
F-J
CD
t•
(D
P.
14
9,
v
_v = C D CD D G D ~ _ CD G.
y O c°n -0 O o -h
(O ,y
n m CC CD O O
o`o g~ 0 CD
oCD~
cn 0 3 v m c cn v,
D D ° rt
CO X CT C CD
C - C
Cn N .Cn-.- BCD CD _MU) -1
'
CD
m co
o o o O
~ C 6 N O rt
Q C m N .O O S
n_ O CD N m. Q CD 7
o~ CL r.L
=3 Cl) 0- Cr
C o -a- CD a CL
=3 -a 3
- SR 7:w 0
(n S~ c o Q.
Cn CD 0 C - 5
•o n- g v m o o O O
0 3 CD :3
o
Cnn O _ CD O-. CD su
D O
C C) at rt =
N CD U)
O O
CD
COD CAD ccn
CD 3
cn O N CD
cn CD a
c
CO m N CD C
m ° N
n
CD 0
l< 0 ~ CD
CT
c N 7
Cn 3
D
i Y
r
~Ikr
(0:
07 CL)
C CD 0- X
CD D
7 Cr CD
O fl cn
O Cr N
$ X 3.
v c CD
O O CD
C O CD m
CND =(n
OO
0- 9 CD m o
5 O
CD
CD ~
n~ Q
o < v
Q
N 7
0 CD
~ M Ln.
0 O X
m Cn Cr
c,D Epr O
0 v 0
M CD
m l n < c
M N m
cn cn o
O
CD :q
0
r~
f
,
-J!
Z3
CL
CD
(n
"
v
0 CD
D
T.
In ,
N CD
(D
v
C
O
D
.C
(
D
-
n
O
p
.
~
,
7•
T.
c c~
(D (D
v In
n
CD
♦
I
ww~~
•v
u i r - T
1 u ti
.°v{'• ,
CD
c,
(
o a, q
_
w
:3 c
D
U)
.
N
p'
D
CD
(7
-
M
ID
n
C
0
O
~
(D
<D
C
(n
CD 0
a
. .
O
O-.
p
j O
CD
(D
•
O_
(Q
(n C
cn
O
c
7 N
o
In cn
O
cn
d/
C,
°O Q
7
(D
N
n
<
cD v
N
.
c _ rn.
C„
3
°
Cl)
0
Q
Cj) C
°
CD
a
=
3
`o °
V
CD
m
:
<
n
0 <
:5.
E
CL CL
3
CL 0
'0 CID
C
D
.
O
Er C
07
U)
:E
D
CD
M O
N
C
O
C
*
_
CD (o
O
~
N
Q CE
O. m
O N
CD c0
p C
P
.C
O (
`G O
_
^
0)
cl) 2.
N
5 =3
o
5CD
v
C
D
Lz
v
N-
Q N
(Q (D
(p
p
n
O
5D
;2~- CD
(n
CD
-0 C=
cn
FD
=r
CL
Z3
cn
7 cn
cn
CD
P-
J r.7
p
cr
cn
CD 7•
cn O
Q
O
CD
CD O
7
O
(D
N
CD
pOj M
py.
+
C
CD
~
O
O
• O
CD ;:L
(D
O
N
O
cn
CD "a
D~.
II)
U
) n
Q
a
D
-
co `:Z
F5,
-0 =3
C)
~
(a
CIS
C/)
cn
_
O
<p cA C
O
CD
CD
Cl) =3
5' 0) C:t
=3 0
9L c)
l<
0
D
CL =3
C
O
D
N
O
~
cn
O
E- cD-
. CD
_
U)
v
-
O
_
Q
CD O N
=
:3 U)
(o
C
N
C
v
7 <
Q n•
T i~
N
-
CD
co O
~
O
Q O
- `G
M C-)
C1 O
=
O
O•
(o
3
m
U' C
C
)
•
=3
cr
-
0-
@
5n
C
n
2.
>
>
D
co
2
CD-
=r O
N
CD
O
(Q O
O .
C
N
CD
p
=
O
ca-
CD
PK'
CD
w
CD
cn
0 =r
=r
O
o
=F
= o
:37
::37
Q
O
Cf)
0 0
"
3=
a
CD
CD
(n
9-
3
c
(
Q E:
3
~
m
M
=
m
°
<D
~ m
+
i
i o
CD
m
~
° (p
a
m
n~
m
D
CD
-
CD CD
(D
a
cnn a
CD
(D
Q'
n C7 -I
CD
=5 =
-'C3 Cn
=7
.
CD Zr
0 CL
;=w
5R
CL
CD
C+
N ~
d O
O
CD `G
O
M CD
O CD
CD
U)
CD y
CD =3
CD
CD
-0
-n 0
- 0)
@ E3
1
-0
0
&; w
P.
CD (D
:D
Cn CD
CL
p a: fn
~
w
=r 0
CD
N
O O
=3
In O
D
- (n
Fr
(D
~
CD
~
<
rn
_
i
n
o
~ o
v
a 5
(D
_
r
W
m cT
O
u~
n
ccn
m~
a Q
c
c
CD Q.
°
(n
C
°
f'+
'
O
C
Cn
X
~p O
-p
CD
co
(D
T
=3
v
0
a
-
G
N
T
u)
a:r
7
C
(
0
o
a
.
~
-a
co cn
SD
CD
W, 5
CD
0-
o
a'~i
3
o
=
- ~
<n
,
0-
1 CD
CL
CD
0-
=r
T
77
0
m
CD =3
°
CD
c
l<
(D
vi
-
a
a m
=
v
o
=
2
v
cn
3
S°
CD
a~
cn
o
o
(D
CD
co
0
CD
a
N
o
m
~
•
r.
CD
o
°
CD
3
C+
D
°O
c
-
a
v
U)
o
CD
3
m
_0
En
°
m
CD
c
m
o
BCD
0
~
O
_
cn
0
0
CD
a-
C)
cn
~
=3
°
o
a
CL
3
o
O
z:
cQ
O
CD
CD
cn
s '
cs'
m
o
P
OP
S
4 ds ~
~i ~r
r.
Q
(DI 0
< r
3 m
n' ~
a' cn
m -I
n n~ -I
y x o
N
W
Q- CD
CD
a
,
I
U
m c
pr
77
_
CD
Cl)
a o
~
.
o
m s
> o
C
,
::r
a
o
_
U)
-0
a
CD
CD
_
CD
E3 c
c
c,:z-
O N
5 c
sT c
CD
m 3
O C
.
(Q
CD
3
r•F C
a
-
0
n
Q
0= 0
N
3
j '
a n
CD 0
CD
C
)
a
Q
~n
n
~O
acv
CD
0-
G
N
0
=r
cQ
CD
D
~
'
x
=r
0
CD
C
0) m
Q
U)
v' °
C
m
o
c
CD CC
0
a
0
CD
m CD
=r
CD
m
O
CD
o
o CD
4
CL
v
°
m
o
~
v
L
o
t
n
~ ert
~
3
m
70
3v
s cn
Co
CD
• Q
-
3
-
=
Q
CD O
O
O 0
O
0 0
o,
s
CD
~
CD
Cn
Q
0)
`G
cn =
C
0
co
CD
p„F
CD
L 0
C
CD
SL
CD
cn
n
=r
CCD
.
(fl
?
O
0
-
O
O
~
0-
CAD Vi
o Co
O
CL 0
°
o
_0
c
a,
C-
°
CD G
C
,
41D .L t.
o
n
m
o
a- N
_ E
,G
cn
v'
CD v'
m CD
Q
O
C
O
O
GO O
CD
51
cu
O
3
=3
N =r
CD
=r o
CD
N
N
O
O
CD
Q
g
3
CD
x
(n
x
•
m
o
-
~
Q 0 Z D
CD m
to =
-0 =r
o
x
n
°
Q
Q
n
=
i
a
°
c
0
00
-
3
=r cn
cn cn
(gyp
l
= CC) C') Q
N' Q
v
ca
Cr
a
_
:4
M.
v
x M 0
a
C) <
CD
0
CD -0 CL
CA
CD
CD
,
CD M
FD 0 :3
CO
n
=r
=r
•
'
0
n' CD Cl)
CD
D
'
o
n
7
CD
n O
S
C
,
o
<
C. y
o
CD
Q
0 0
WM 0
CD -
N CD U)
CD
C
D
N
o _ ;:w c
CD
n CD
X
X
O
CL)
~
D
C
°
vii
co
v
cn
-.0,
p
•
<
_0
cfl
a
A
CD a
~
o _o
3°
Q
CD
C
cr C
M
CD
-3
C
D
Q
C/)
v,
°
CD
O
L
C
D
o v
O CC N
CD
CD
n C
Q
CD 3
CD
CD
CD
3°
?0
Q=
v
m
CD
7
7
CL C@
N N n
7 00
j
W cn
7
CD 0
7 0 .nom 0
3
d
G,
o Q
0 v
-a
<D CD
0
Cn
m
cQ
-a
m- 3
O = 3
CD
n
CD
v
3
N. o
< -60
CD cn o =3
CD
0)
0
CD
cr
cn
_0
_0
:3
n' v
M =3
3 CD
a~ cn
O
-
-A
0
m 0
0
0
n
c=
.a m
v
6
0
o
o
°
cD
3
cCn m
0 C
o
c cn
a O c°
c
n
o
i
G
0
x"
3 3 cD Cn
OD
to
3 c
Nl p~
T
m
0 - Q
CD
. a
O C
a-
C
Cn 7
Cn
n
0
3 O
=
CD
CD ~
O
W
0 0 =r Cn
0)
N
Ca
0
w 0
(Q 3
' n. ~G
m 3 c
-0-
CD
CD
41.
'V
x
1
r
S
<D
~G•
U)
(D
V `'S
1(D
X
F..J
r
(D
Pu
v
v
It+
0
V
It+
(D
w
w
0
v
G1
c'I•
P.
N
P
(D
fr
C1
A~
O
CD
(n
Cn
N
(C)
ZT
O
(Q
c+
En
w
N
m
m
m
CD
O N O
O
O
°
°
a
c
cD .c ?
<
F.s
W
cr
9)
(D
E
O
0 c
CND N
0
CD
•
t
En
~
G1
(M
B
c
CD
M
2)
a~
CD
c)
~
(a
`G Con
O
Q
,
CD (n
CD
u
(D
O
iv
•
(Q
a
~n
=
2
t`J'
V
cn
C
~-q 3
O
CD
O
a 0
~
CD
2<) CD
o
Q
N c
c0D
CD O
P,
CD
o
C7
CCDD
v
cQ
m w
a
CD
c m cg
CD
l
G
P.
CD
o
l<
c
°
°
O
O
*
(0)
3
Si
a
m
+
Q
9
i-'
0
CD
`
En
p,
O-
_
CD
O CQ C
77
5 cn
-
Er
=3
CD
t+
t+
(D
°
Q
CD
= :E
con C
Q
_0
0_ 0
F~
(D
cn
CD
cQ (3
0,
c
Q m
O
O _
cl>
CD
cn
CD
CD X `G
•
C
Q
IL)
fT
I
n
0
°
ZY
=
CD
c
CD
+
•
CD
C
N
110 tTj
QQ X
CD
O
~h
CD
(D
(b
0')
CA)
CY)
CJl
•A
.p
O
-t
D
Cl)
o
CD
Q o
v c m
m w
U)
0
CD
O
Q
n o
-
o=
C) CD 0
CD
0o m
°
0 6
~
(D
Q
CD
- :-37
m
m m
Q
cD
_ 7
m
=3
Vl
CD
Z5*
°
CD CD
CD
g
CD Cr
c
5
CD
cn
77-
'C
O
E3 6P7
c
CUD
v
m
0
= CD o
0
0
x
o'
a
o
°
°
a
°
m
r.
N
c
u~
= m
2L _n _
v
_
o
of fl,
n
=
m
,
co
u~
=r
~D
te
.
o c
D
O
v C
Q
c o
x
A
'
rF
O
to
0 0
CD
C0
CD :3
0
B
m
D
cr
U)
a)
CD
N
iv
E~' ;s
D
C') cn
CL
w
P7
O CD
B
iZ
o ~G y
O cc c
X m c
C
-
'
VI
su
C CD
CD
= a
'J
N
N
0
N =
a
N
O-
.
Q
o
S
m
O
cn)
O
=s =3
O
CD
cr
~
N C
N
~
0 U)
O 0 O
Cv
o N
77
=
O
cl)
0 "0
,
(D
`D
O
O
C ,,,C Cn
0 O
_
_
v
CD
P,7- 77
CD
*
O O
=3
A
CD
_
_
= d =
-0
CD C
C
i~
C
D N
CD
CD
O
Q- Cr CD
0
'0 CD
-
f-I
N
-0
0-
I_
p.~.
O
C7
•
p) 0 Q
m
-
Q-
M p
O
O CD
Q O
<
CD
cr
0
=t
n c)
O-~
m
?c
iv
:y
=r
=1
~
3
N
~
'
o
~
CL
O
(9.
0
CD
=
Q
,
CD
0 0
c
n
-
PT,
S
CD
rl.
ii
0
O N
a
-
=F
Q
O
CD
O
M
o
o
0)
ui* 0-
0
= :
m
CL
n
t
Q
c
CD O
c6 C
N
v 0
a C
D
Q
=
Q-
O
Q
C2
tw
-L
Q
+
y 7
N
•
♦
)
C -
~ Z
Cn
_I~D
3
O
N
(7
W
(D
~
n
• p•
CD O g
CD
ig~
y O
Q
S
2 -fin
y
CD
CD =3
m N
O
in a in y
<
a
a
Cv
cc S
_
=
° m
D
n'
v
° 5
y
Q
F`~J+
C
D
C/)
_
-10
CD
CD
N
m
E
F r
1
CD
fl• C
CD
S2. w
C
(n
D
N
U)
En
CD
N
to Q
ccn
(
CD D
D
Q
:
M
N O O
C
F..J
Q
CD
0
Q O CD O VOi
Cg
v n
3
,
3 W, CpD O
N a" ~
-0
O
- y
° p
Cl)
0- N
c cn D
CL CD
Q
3
CD
N
a'
_
W O p
CCDD 5 CD
y
v
cn
P,
y
N
CD f1
N
Q O
p
-a
i
•Y
u
O CD (O 7 O Q
=r G-
m sv
CD
O N
n' CA (n
v o
CD
}
~
V
H
• ,
-P 'C3 '
p N y E
y
N
O CD
N
V
=
C.)7 ~ O y v CD
CD CD
Q
y
=3 O p ~P
Cn' CD
n
l
CO) _
'A
V
~
n
p CD
o a v y
CD
o
ca y W
G (T
v
0
= 0
CD
0
H
CD
W CD
C
a
Cl)
'O
•
-
S; CD
'
aL
O
0.0
N3
D
;-c- --1
m
?
5
CD
Cn
_ ~
N
Yi
0 Cn
,D
.
0 Q_ CD <
cn
~
Q
N
cQ = p
CAD
0
CD -0
O
p
J)
Y/
.
= GJ
CL y- 25-
cn
_
y
cr
= 0
Q
O
p y CD
•
W
.
R
O
wo
o
CD C9
7
y
~
y:~,
~1.
~T
c
CD
S
in
w v
0 0
_0
CD
`
CL
O Cp
- p CD CD
=
,
5
CD p~
C
a
cp G
!R p
O
cc
vii
c C
c
0
O
n CD
C
7
N
3 CD CD 7
O
U)
CD
n
CD
[1
En
O
a `G
CD 3
j
(D
CD
n
CD CD O
0 y~
C ::Dg
CD
=
S O
c c
-yp
C+
3
S CD
0
-
n
O
D
D
'
p
0
CD
p
=3
p
C) - C
l p
CD c
~
D
CD CAD
~ =3
' Cl)
N
I
°
n
O
O
a co.
o
CD
F
y s O 'i
~
?
o
p
D
sll
c
_
n
=1
n
O
O
W
{
~
cy
a
i a
-
o
am
i
m v
-2
;
b t=i
n `G CD
CD
-T.• p (D
CD
C9
v p v
:
.3
CD
3
C7-
C7
0 L
CD
(n >
C
w =3
CD
=3
C
r
r 0
-a
EL
°
CD
CD
•
.
c
°
cD
c~
m
m v
gy
~
O+
CD
cD CD
m
n s °
CD
c
CD
D o
m
-
~
(
p
(
y
CQ
J
~
sv CD y
v
O CD a O
O
Z 07
x
C1 CD
= - O
CD
O
cn CD
0 [2
O
.
O
C d
O
0
Vi
.G
.L3
n
0)
O Q p
N
C
0)
C
O
.
1
CO
r
O
UT a)
7 y
G
C
c
n
O p' c
t3
CD
=
CD
,CD
I E ~J J
C1
-
C
s -
C)
CD
2_
In
y
N
.
' "
'r
O
p .3•t
CD
n
C;7
=r
7-
N
2 ff
@
Q
Z'
CL
U)
=3
CD
=
5~
a)
a
cc
C
:3 m -
m°
m
CL
p
.
0 m H
-
ccn
cn
n
D c
0
(n
n
0
-
CD
o
O
0
Q C d
cn
C)
07
w
CL CD 5
v
O
0.
=r
•
=
s m
O
a,
cr cQ
=r
y
m
y
=
m
O
-
m
(D
0
l<
~
-
m
CU
m
(1)
°
m C/)
C-) -COD
y
Z3
-
CD
N p' O
Spy
O
o F3-
v p
C
)
'O CD BCD -
O
:3
~
<
N
O
N
C
CD
0
::3' o
p n
w n
-
rt
CD
O
Z
m "
C
'
'
_F
CO 0
Er
CD
° *
CD v
cn p n ~ C
D
=y- (n
j
O
CD
p
N
~
~
II
-
CD
SU C
CD
0 p
CD
O C
N
6 CD
n CD
O.
=r 0
?
.
CD
CL
;
U
:3
CL
CL
c 3
a y CD
~
CD
n
cQ Q
3 p to
m
H
o m
v, CD ss
2°
r
m
ui a>
CD
9 m
CD
0)
c
CD
N
~
Z M c°
w
X
0)
(J7
'a ZS
0) O C
n
N
CD v
`C
O
CD
. N CD
O N CU
O C2
0
W
is CD
51, C)- m
=3
0
_
C
:E
:
:3
O
Cr
CD
rn
cD
CD SU
CD C
-C3
m
D
CD
O (n
n~ O
0
=r
v
=r
Ol
y
CD =r a
°
CD
& 0
CD
EL -o
= m
CD
V)
A
m
a
° M
o
rn°
? o CD
CD
N
CD
cn c
o
p
~
v,
0-
(D
CA
U)
N
CQ
O
(Q
U4
CD
~()Q :4*
~-h W
r
O
0~ W=^oo
c
p
Q~ n
y C
ID
d
W
rt
"
CD tZ ~
3
at,
A
CD
<
~
►
CD
N
CD
O
-
CD 0
C
D
a,
CD
o O x
a~
m
c
E
S
L.
O
Q
<
j
O
<
O
CL
SU
3 y a~ n
N
-
fl?
it ca
E
n
N
0
O ~D
CD
V1
~D
, &
o
v
CD
O
Cr
C
x
W
- y
O
CD
Can CD
CD O
CD
CD
C7
y
0 o
n~ m .
3
m o
vi
c~
U)
W
3
n 0.
0
co::: zn
CD
CD
(5'
=3
CL
CD
cn
,
_0
CD
W
o
CD
0
CO
O
r
O u0i p
CD
r
O
p
c
Cn
to
•a
N
c p ~c
C
CD
CD
v
C+•
mot
CD
U)
2t CD N
1
cf)
CD
N
Cfl 0
<
.
/
•
C
C
cn CD
5n
0
U) CL
CD
N
~
C
> O
CD
!-r
CD
Q 3 a
l
CD
(D
CD
CD
O
Er
O
O
O
6
`C
O.
O
O
0
F3
°
C
V
CQ
41D
♦w
V•
C
fi
•
CD
W
(
n
0
^
^
-o
CD
0
a
CCD
-<O
g
3
CD
=3
0
43 C-)
CD
F-J
rt
o ~ CS
D
m s
tv
(
O
7 T.
•
~
N
7
O Ct?
N~
C
CA T
0
a
C7 z z
<
°
y o r
m v
C
Q -i
0
?
c
CD
~
ct,
-n w
CD CS
ac n y
]7 a7
(7 m CD
CD
Q'
_
Q
Q N
CD w
CP
C
C)
3
CD
m
°
O C
7r
-
CD
=d M
az
m
M
-D
D C-D
m
40 C'
CD n
CA
Cn
r
v
o
Er
p p
c=
o
m
o
co
y
m
- O
Q
r
o
y
CD
a
o
CD
r ct~
a
n
CD
C) CD
O
N
O
N 'r
CD
cv
3_ p
C
7c Cn
N
CD
O
C=
o
v
p~
(
r
CD
N j N C,
m y
N
y ~7
[
Z
n' M
O
d
_
C~
~
CD
cn a
n
o
n fl
D
~
•
•
Z
_
CD CD y
0
3
(p
y
N fcn
`n cL
O
CD
<
n
Cn 0
O
C~
$
a
o m O
CQ
y
d
0 N
Cn
3
o
m
m
c a
CD v
m
C7
-CJ
N•
O
.
n rD
so
sv
~
O
co
c
CD
O
CL
0
(S
CD
O
-0
-
N
CD
s
O
1
QQ ~
CD
I,D
O 4l
i
N
U
A
CD
0 <
-I (j)
CD N
Cn
<
N
CD- =:9 N
CD Cn
I CA
O U)
A)
-
-
~ E- CD _0
_0 CD
N
0
? 'CD
=
N a - CD
D
N
i3 0-0
CD CCD
-a
7 .-f
A
O
Er' -4
07
c
C"
CD A
(p W
IV
O
-
(O O
CO) Cn r
y
CO)
CD CD
Q
m D
m2C
X
m CA
O
co o-
a)
F:5
-3
En
m
-'P
lq'
O
.n-.
"O CD 7r
G 7
=3 D)
N CD =r
CD .-f
cc
rt
CD CL
CD O
- 7
CD
O fv
O
zT Cy
CD W
O
'
O
CD
7
O
<
N
c0 .O
CD
T. 0
CD O
CD O CND
C
O N C
O
=3
'
70
O
to
CQ
c>_ Q
C7 O
?
C
-C
r2 ?
N
Cr
O Cv
C=D 'd
-
I D)
.
O Cf
N
.O-t cr
, C
d
cn C
)
Cn
w 7
O
O
(
CD
O
cn
X
= y
w
En
v
=
7
C
a 3
N O
C1
-
CD
Cn
CD
Cn CD
CD
Q-
CD
13L) ;7-
55,
N
X
°
C
cr o
n
m
m
c
CD
cn
o
cr
o
v
a
CD
v
a
c
cr
_
0
m
cn C;
c-- CD
0)
CD.
CD
CL
CD
(n
Cfl
C
l< Cn
O. U)
m
CD
X
S
= O
N
G
CD
Cr
=
a cn
CD
Cim
O
p
O
~
d
Q
~
C
CD
a
=3
C1
to
O
O
O
n
d
J
Q
v
CD
V)
c-r
ry0
=0
C)
CD
CAD
CD
r-+
c )
v
ll l
cf) CD
O ~1)
x C)
= --f-
~ID (C)
}-D 1 1
Cf)
CD
-TS
O
Cf) lV
0 C-)
O O
CC)
Cf)
O
0
CD
C
CD
r-L
CD
c~
Omni 0
UA
r-L
0
CD
CU
cr
p
cn
CD
CL
O y
~ o
CD
8D
o ~
~CD
CD
p
cr
r
cn
CD
c~
CD
C)
0
v
a~
0
110 m
CD
o~
0
d o
S
o ICD
$CD
C~
• C
CCDD
o y P7- CD
o CD o
~ CD
dI o ~ CD
O~D
CD
o C
CD
o ~ d
CCD CD
CD
CD~
a.
0
y
n
n
°o
a
d
n
0
cD
x
n
c
m
c7
0
3
~ v
o~
co ~o c: (D
CD r-+.
(J)
i~
rMolm
0
m~
0 =37
rMolm
It tTl
I~
o~
0
w N
n O v~ y
CD
CD CD
0 CD
CD C'
~:l v1
D
O v'
O CD
CDCD CD O
~ ~ CAD n
CAD
CAD
O
O
n
CAD
all
CAD
n
n
W
p
CL
O
CAD
C
CD
CD
0
N
CD
0
0
CD
0
00
J
O
O
CD ~
O
CD
CD
O
O
0
CAD
CD
O
CD
C.
CD
A
CD
CD
d
N
r
n
It
0
v
v
m
0
r--1-
0
C~
o a
z
o
CD
o
b ~
C
o
dl
mmowNh
I~
0
0
n
CD
CD
rMolm
CD
0
rmmlm
CD
n
rMolm
CD
m
~
v
0
3
N
r
0
v
n
c
~
3
m
o~
a
• • •
d O CD
CD o
o ~
orQ
~ o
7d ~
CD
CD
~o
n CD
CD
•
CCD
0
C~
0
CD
d
CD
CD
C~ d
o ~
O n
P7A
O ~
~ o
CD i
d CD
C-D .
~ o
CD
•
d
CD o o_ ~
o~
n '"r C
n~
C m~
..moo
~o
c~
v
c~
N
N
rm+k
0
r
c~~
rMalm
o~
I~
ITJ D
CD CD >
CL C:).
Z n C-D d
CD
CAD o GC.C D O
+ CD
CD 0
C , p •--s CD r~-r C Cf4
C-D
CAD CD CD p ~ CD CD CD
"
v~ n CAD r~-+-
CDP
o
CD
CD CD
CD
y
0
CD
CD
5
•
•
O
CD
C~
O
O ~
d~
O
N
r
OQ
0
• • • • • • • •
c~
CD
C C
O ~ ~
►~i A~
A CD• CD
~CD
4
CL
0
c.
CAD
w
CD
C)
n
CAD
•
1
p
l1J
•
•
V ~f
O
v
~
q
n
~
~
(
C-D
11
C
C
CD
0-.
kA
0
CD
~
ICD
~
0
CL
~
~
~
0 -
o
CL
o
~
CL
CD
D
N
r
QQ ~
CD
O
C
y
0
0
al
r-I
l
11D
p
CD
O
t7~
C
-
o
o
v,
CD
-p
~:l
00
~
CD
CAD
0
t
CD
O
00
w
CD
ul
C) 0
CAD
r+
CD
o
0
(
jp
,
~
c7l
W
~
CD
~
~
~
~
p
~
~
~
~
5
~
CD
CD
0
O
0
O
CD
•
~
y1
r
~
F•r ,
CD
tnt
0
0
N
N
O
O
•
1
CD
ll~
O
O
O
N
r
O
CD
n
CD
I_
0
op
0
w
00
w
c~
Ul
00
0
n
CD
CD
T
MMI
CD
CD
o'
-o
0
(0
3
m
CD
O
0
mn
CL
0
CD
CD
Ep
C
73
CL
Q)
CD
Q.
c.Q
0
CL
CD
CD
U)
0)
7
FY 2006-2008 REQUEST for PROPOSALS
APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
BYRN E M ETHAM P H ETAM I N E
REDUCTION GRANT PROGRAM
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES DIVISION
OREGON OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY
4760 PORTLAND ROAD NE
SALEM, OR 97305
DRUG COURT IMPLEMENTATION
AND ENHANCEMENT GRANT
PROGRAM
OREGON CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION
635 CAPITOL STREET NE, SUITE 350
SALEM, OR 97301
APPLICATION DUE DATE: APRIL 3, 2006
Exhibit U _
Page I oflE,
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Fiscal Years 2006-2008 Request for Proposals
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Introduction ...........................................................................................................1
Intent of This Request for Proposals ....................................................................1
Application Due Date ............................................................................................2
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
1.
State Administering Agency ..........................................................................4
II.
Availability and Duration of Funding
..4
III.
Grant Program Goals
..4
IV.
Eligible Applicants
..4
V.
Funding Priorities
..5
A. Rationale
..5
B. Eligible Program Categories
..5
VI.
Recommended Approach
..6
A. Evidence-Based Programs
..6
B. Best Practices Guidelines
..7
C. Family Dependency Treatment Court Model
..7
D. Drug Endangered Children Protocol
..8
VII.
Application Instructions and Requirements
..8
A. Application Length and Format
..8
B. Application Contents
..8
1. Cover Sheet
..8
2. Proposed Program Narrative
9
a. Program Description
..9
b. Demonstration of Need for the Program
10
c. Evidence of Collaboration in Planning and Implementation
10
d. Evidence of Staff Professionalism and Cultural Competency
10
3. Plan for Assessing Program Implementation and Monitoring Program
Outputs
11
4. Proposed Budget Worksheet and Budget Narrative
13
5. Plan to Identify Continuation Funding
13
VI 11.
Application Review and Award Decisions
14
A. Review Process
14
B. Award Decisions
14
IX.
Award Conditions
15
A. State Administering Agency Award Conditions
15
1. Monitoring
15
2. Progress Reports
15
3. Requests for Reimbursement
15
4. Due Dates for Progress Reports and Requests for Reimbursement..
15
5. Grant Suspension or Termination
16
Exhibit -i--)
Page 2 of Q !p
S
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Fiscal Years 2006-2008 Request for Proposals
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
B. Federal Award Conditions ......................................................................16
1. Unallowable Costs .............................................................................16
2. Supplanting ........................................................................................17
3. Drug-Free Work Place, Debarment, Lobbying ...................................17
4. Civil Rights Compliance .....................................................................17
5. Single Audit ........................................................................................18
6. National Environmental Policy Act Compliance .................................18
X. References .................................................................................................20
Appendix A
Cover Sheet Format ...........................................................................................22
Appendix B
Program Implementation Timeline Format ..........................................................23
Appendix C
Oregon Treatment Court Management System Overview 24
Appendix D
Budget Worksheet Format 25
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
1. State Administering Agency
27
II. Availability and Duration of Funding
27
III. Grant Program Goals
27
IV. Eligible Applicants
28
V. Funding Priorities
28
A. Rationale
28
B. Eligible Program Categories
29
VI. Recommended Approach
29
VII. Application Instructions and Requirements
30
A. Application Length and Format
30
B. Application Contents
30
1. Cover Sheet
30
2. Proposed Program Narrative
30
a. Program Description
30
b. Demonstration of Need for the Program
32
c. Evidence of Collaboration in Planning and Implementation
32
d. Evidence of Staff Competency
32
3. Plan for Assessing Program Implementation and Monitoring Program
Participants
33
Exhibit 7
Page 3 of - 4(P
z +
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Fiscal Years 2006-2008 Request for Proposals
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
4. Proposed Budget Worksheet and Budget Narrative ...............................33
5. Ability to Leverage Other Funds & Cost Effectiveness of the Proposed
Program 33
VIII. Application Review and Award Decisions 34
A. Review Process ......................................................................................34
B. Award Decisions .....................................................................................34
IX. Award Conditions ........................................................................................35
A. State Administering Agency Award Conditions 35
1. Monitoring 35
2. Progress Reports 35
3. Requests for Reimbursement 35
4. Due Dates for Progress Reports and Requests for Reimbursement.. 36
5. Grant Suspension or Termination 36
X. References 37
Appendix E
Cover Sheet Format 38
Appendix F
Program Implementation Timeline Format ..........................................................39
Appendix G
Oregon Treatment Court Management System Overview ..................................40
Appendix H
Budget Worksheet Format ..................................................................................41
Appendix I
Drug Court Performance Measures 42
'r
Exhibit D _
Page of -4
State of Oregon
Fiscal Years 2006-2008 COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAMS
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Introduction
The State of Oregon, through the
Criminal Justice Services Division
(CJSD) of the Office of Homeland
Security and the Criminal Justice
Commission (CJC), announces the
availability of $5,500,000 in grant funds
to be competitively distributed during
fiscal years 2006-2008 for the purposes
of reducing the drug use and drug-
related problems of offenders
throughout the state. Particular
emphasis is placed on reduction of
methamphetamine use and related
problems.
In his February 2004 address to the
Oregon Public Safety Review Steering
Committee, Governor Kulongoski
declared methamphetamine as one of
the greatest public safety challenges
facing the state. A newly created
Methamphetamine Task Force was
charged with developing a responsive
statewide strategy. Highlighted among
the January 2005 Task Force
recommendations were the need for
Oregon to expand delivery of effective
drug court supervised addiction
treatment with adjunct services to
reduce methamphetamine use, and
delivery of effective services to protect
the health and safety of
methamphetamine-affected children (1).
The Task Force also helped to develop
a legislative agenda that resulted in the
enactment of several laws aimed at
reducing methamphetamine production,
distribution, and demand (2).
Intent of this Request for Proposals
The intent of this Request for Proposals
(RFP) is to advance the Task Force
recommendations and related legislation
through the administration of the
following two grant programs.
Through the Byrne Methamphetamine
Reduction Grant Program, CJSD is
soliciting applications seeking funding
for interagency case management,
addiction treatment, mental health care,
and related essential services for drug
court and / or dependency court
supervised parenting and pregnant
methamphetamine-using women and
their children.
Through the Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program, CJC is soliciting
applications seeking funding for drug
court coordinators and drug court
supervised addiction treatment to
support the implementation of new drug
courts and the enhancement of existing
drug courts serving adults, juveniles,
and families.
Exhibit
Page 5 of 4(0
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
This RFP details the guidelines relevant
to each grant program separately,
including the:
■ State administering agency
■ Availability and duration of funding
■ Grant program goals
■ Eligible applicants
■ Funding priorities
■ Recommended approach
■ Application instructions and
requirements
■ Application review and award
decisions
■ Award conditions
A single applicant may respond under
either or both grant programs.
Applicants must comply with all of the
relevant guidelines of a grant program to
be considered for funding.
Under the Byrne Methamphetamine
Reduction Grant Program, at least 25
percent of program funding must be in
the form of a cash match. CJC has
determined that all or part of the 25
percent cash match requirement of the
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction
Grant Program may be fulfilled with
funds received for that purpose from the
Drug Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program. The
method for calculating the required
amount of the match is described in the
budget section of the application
instructions.
Application Due Date
The application due date is the same for
both grant programs. One original and
ten copies of each application must be
received (not post-marked) by 5:00
PM Monday, April 3, 2006. Only
materials included as part of the
application will be considered in the
review process. Late applications or
additions to an original application to
meet the grant program guidelines will
not be accepted. Neither facsimiles nor
email submissions will be accepted.
Applications must be submitted
separately to CJSD for funding under
the Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction
Grant Program and to CJC for funding
under the Drug Court Implementation
and Enhancement Grant Program.
Postal mail and hand-delivery
addresses are provided below.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction
Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Oregon Office of Homeland Security
4760 Portland Road NE
Salem, OR 97305
Phone: (503) 378-4145
Drug Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program
Oregon Criminal Justice Commission
635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 350
Salem, OR 97301
Phone: (503) 986-6494
2
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Exhibit
Page Ca of 4CP
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction
Grant Program
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit -0
Page -7 0 f 4fP
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Byrne Methamphetamine
Reduction Grant Program
1. State Administering Agency
CJSD provides services to the Oregon
criminal justice community through the
administration of federal grant programs
that reduce drug use and violent crime
and improve the effectiveness of the
criminal justice system. CJSD
administers eleven federal grant
programs, including the Edward Byrne
Memorial State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance Grant Program.
Byrne Formula Grant Program funds are
appropriated under the 1988 Anti-Drug
Abuse Act (Public Law 100-690), and
are administered to states by the US
Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Assistance (DOJ / BJA) (3).
The funding priority areas of the Byrne
Formula Grant Program are developed
by CJSD in collaboration with the
Governor's Office. Funds reserved from
previous year allocations of the Byrne
Formula Grant Program have recently
been authorized for distribution through
the Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction
Grant Program described in this RFP.
Agencies / organizations responding to
this RFP will be screened and selected
by CJSD in collaboration with the
Governor's Drug and Violent Crime
Advisory Board.
II. Availability and Duration of
Funding
A total of $3,000,000 will be distributed
through the Byrne Methamphetamine
Reduction Grant Program during fiscal
years 2006-2008. This is a one-time
solicitation, offering support for a
maximum period of two years. CJSD
anticipates that approximately
$1,500,000 supporting up to ten grants
4
will be distributed each year. First year
funding is expected to begin July 1,
2006 and end June 30, 2007. Second
year funding will be based on grantee
compliance with award conditions.
III. Grant Program Goals
The goals of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program are to help methamphetamine-
using parenting and pregnant women to
be sober and responsible caregivers
and to help methamphetamine-affected
children to be healthy and safe from
neglect and abuse. Women and
children affected by methamphetamine
are frequently involved in concurrent
drug court and dependency court cases.
Through this solicitation, CJSD will
support communities in improving their
ability to assist methamphetamine-using
parenting and pregnant women and
methamphetamine-affected children
who are under the jurisdiction of a drug
court and / or a dependency court.
IV. Eligible Applicants
Applicants eligible under the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program include existing drug courts,
existing dependency courts, counties,
other units of local government, Native
American tribal governments, as well as
non-profit and for-profit organizations
acting through agreement with these
government entities in Oregon. Non-
profit organizations must attach formal
documentation of their non-profit status
in an appendix to the application.
Although more than one agency /
organization may be involved in the
implementation of a successful grant
application, one lead entity must
represent the applicant and must accept
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit - _
Page a of 4(
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
responsibility for program and fiscal
record keeping and reporting.
V. Funding Priorities
A. Rationale
The funding priorities for the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program are based on research that has
shown that individualized and intensive
guidance and supervision, effective and
sustained addiction treatment, and
access to a comprehensive range of
interrelated support services can
promote recovery, health, and safety for
substance-abusing women and their
children.
B. Eligible Program Categories
There are four eligible Program
Categories that represent the funding
priorities for the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program. Applicants may request
support under one or more of the
following Categories of services that
they identify to be unavailable or
inadequate and needed in their
community:
Category 1
Interagency methamphetamine case
management programs for women and
children aimed at coordinating
assessment, planning, linkage,
monitoring, and advocacy services.
By the time most substance-abusing
women and their children come to the
Category 2
attention of authorities, they face
Methamphetamine addiction treatment
multiple mental health, health, social,
programs for women.
and economic problems. In addition to
needing addiction treatment, substance-
Category 3
abusing women frequently need
Programs for methamphetamine-using
services that enable them to remain in
women that promote addiction treatment
and complete treatment, prevent and
completion, relapse prevention, mental
address addiction relapse, and / or
health, safety, self sufficiency, parenting
enhance self-sufficiency, parenting
skills, and family relationships.
skills, and family relationships. Their
children, frequently suffering from the
Category 4
effects of neglect or physical, emotional,
Programs for methamphetamine-
and / or sexual abuse, may need mental
affected children that promote mental
health care, other health care, and
health, health, and safety.
protection. Moreover, substance-
abusing women and their children
Eligible types of expenses within
typically need assistance in identifying
Category 1 for women and children
and arranging access to recommended
include case managers / advocates and
services and in complying with court-
case outreach workers / aides and
related requirements.
related support. Eligible types of
expenses within Category 3 for women
include mental health care, medical
care, dental care, anger management
programs, domestic violence services,
co-dependency education, support
groups, parenting training, family
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
5
Exhibit-
Page C' of 4 (p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
services, GED preparation, technical
training, job counseling, mentoring, and
assistance with housing, transportation,
and childcare.
Eligible types of expenses within
Category 4 for children include mental
health care, medical care, dental care,
forensic interview services, victim
advocacy services, family services,
relief nursery care, childcare, and
temporary placement.
VI. Recommended Approach
Applicants proposing to employ an
evidence-based program or best
practices guidelines, adopt the
principles of the family drug treatment
court model, and deliver services in
accordance with the local Drug
Endangered Children protocol will be
given funding priority under the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program.
A. Evidence-Based Programs
CJSD has long promoted funding of
evidence-based programs through the
Byrne Formula Grant Program. An
evidence-based program is defined here
as one that has met recognized
research standards using an
experimental or quasi-experimental
study design, has established
replicability, and has been published in
the research literature.
The recent enactment of ORS 181.637,
sections 3-10 (Senate Bill 267), which
mandates five other state administering
agencies to direct an increasing
percentage of funds toward evidence-
based programs beginning in 2005,
provides an important new opportunity
for CJSD to promote collaborative
selection and delivery of these programs
6
statewide. Moreover, this type of
collaboration will provide the most
consistent and effective long-term
support to local communities.
Therefore, proposals that employ
evidence-based programs will be given
first funding priority. Applicants are
encouraged to first consult state
agencies and research centers in
Oregon for information on evidence-
based programs that have been
identified in response to the new state
law. For example, the Office of Mental
Health and Addiction Services (OMHAS)
of the Oregon Department of Human
Services has developed OMHAS
Approved Practices (4) and the Oregon
Commission on Children and Families
(OCCF) has developed OCCF Best
Practices (5).1 The Northwest Frontier
Addiction Technology Transfer Center, a
project of Oregon Health and Sciences
University Department of Public Health
and Preventive Medicine in collaboration
with OMHAS, also offers a wealth of
information on evidence-based
programs (6).
Some examples of evidence-based
programs that have been identified by
Oregon agencies and that are
appropriate to this RFP are the Matrix
Intensive Outpatient Program for the
Treatment of Stimulant Abuse,
developed by the Integrated Substance
Abuse Programs at the University of
California, Los Angeles (7), Seeking
Safety. Psychotherapy for Trauma /
PTSD and Substance Abuse, developed
at Harvard Medical School / McLean
Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts (8),
Note that OMHAS and OCCF use the terms
approved practices and best practices for evidence-
based programs, and this differs from the use of the
term best practices later in this RFP.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit -7 )
Page t 0 of 4 (o
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
and Wrap Around: A Treatment
Planning Process, developed by the
Kaleidoscope Program in Chicago,
Illinois (9). Applicants may consider
other evidence-based programs as well
Applicants proposing the use of an
evidence-based program should
carefully consider the feasibility of
replicating the selected program at the
local site, in terms of whether the
specific administrative, staffing, training,
and service delivery (core components
and dosage) requirements can be met.
Applicants selected for funding will be
expected to demonstrate fidelity
(adherence) to the program, and may
benefit from contacting the program
developer prior to submitting the
proposal to gather information on how
this might best be achieved.
opinions, and studies of peer-nominated
professionals from substance abuse
treatment programs, hospitals,
community health centers, counseling
programs, criminal justice agencies,
child welfare agencies, and private
practice. The goal of each TIP is to
operationalize a consensus of expert
opinions into the field as quickly as
possible. TIP recommendations may be
attributed to either panelists' clinical
experience or the literature. Examples
of TIPS that are relevant to the funding
priorities of this RFP are
Comprehensive Case Management for
Substance Abuse Treatment. TIP #27
(11), and Treatment for Stimulant Use
Disorders: TIP #33 (12). Applicants
may consider other relevant TIPS or
similar quality best practices guidelines
as well.
B. Best Practices Guidelines
Applicants having difficulty identifying an
evidence-based program that will be
feasible to implement with fidelity may
propose the use of best practices
guidelines. Best practices guidelines
are defined here as those that have
been developed through an iterative
process of practice improvement and
critical review, are the result of a
consensus of recommendations made
by practitioners and researchers in the
field, and have been published in the
practical literature.
The Treatment Improvement Protocols
(TIP) published by the Center for
Substance Abuse Treatment of the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (10) offer some
of the most relevant best practices
guidelines for this RFP. TIPS focus on
substance abuse and related problems
and are based on the experiences,
Applicants selected for funding will be
expected to demonstrate fidelity to the
guidelines, and may benefit from
consulting with one of the TIP
Consensus Panelists or other
individuals involved in the development
or implementation of the identified TIP
prior to submitting a proposal to gather
information on how this might best be
achieved.
C. Family Dependency Treatment
Court Model
To the extent appropriate, applicants
under each Program Category are
encouraged to build upon existing drug
court and / or dependency court
infrastructures in order to promote the
functional (if not the actual) equivalent of
family dependency treatment court
services. The particular advantage of
the family dependency treatment court
approach in this context is that it strives
to balance the relatively lengthy time
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
7
Exhibit _D
Page 11 of.4(o
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
required for methamphetamine
treatment of mothers, the relatively short
timeframe allowed for child permanency
per the Adoption and Safe Families Act
of 1997 (13), and the physical and
emotional needs of children to promote
sobriety, health and safety for women
and children. Based on the highly
successful adult drug court model, the
family dependency treatment court
model is now recognized as the most
targeted and effective intervention for
women and children.
The OJP/ BJA publication, Family
Dependency Treatment Courts:
Addressing Child Abuse and Neglect
Using the Drug Court Model (14),
defines the mission of this court as
follows: "To protect children from abuse
and neglect - precipitated by the
substance abuse of a parent or
caregiver - by addressing the
comprehensive issues of both the
parents and their children through an
integrated, court-based collaboration
among service providers who work as a
team to achieve timely decisions,
coordinated treatment and ancillary
services, judicial oversight, and safe and
permanent placements." This
publication provides detailed information
on how applicants might adapt existing
community infrastructures to achieve the
benefits of the family drug treatment
court approach.
D. Drug Endangered Children
Protocol
Established in 2004, the Oregon
Alliance for Drug Endangered Children
(DEC) has developed a multi-agency
protocol for assisting and protecting
children whose health and safety have
been put at risk by methamphetamine at
home. The protocol involves the
coordinated responses of law
enforcement, child protective services,
prosecutors, and health professionals.
The DEC protocol is currently expanding
to communities throughout Oregon (15).
Applicants under each Program
Category of this RFP are encouraged to
provide training for case managers /
advocates, outreach workers / aides,
and treatment and other service delivery
staff as needed in accordance with the
local DEC protocol, or the Oregon
Alliance for DEC when a local protocol
has not yet been established.
VII. Application Instructions and
Requirements
A. Application Length and Format
Applications should consist of the Cover
Sheet, Proposed Program Narrative,
Plan for Assessing Program
Implementation and Monitoring Program
Outputs, Proposed Budget Worksheet
and Narrative, and the Plan to Identify
Continuation Funding. Applications
must not exceed fifteen pages,
exclusive of the cover sheet, and have a
maximum additional five pages of
appendices. No part of sections VI1.B.1
through 5 may be submitted as an
appendix.
Applications must be submitted on
single-sided, 8% x 11-inch paper, using
one-inch margins, and typed double
spaced with a standard 12-point font.
B. Application Contents
1. Cover Sheet
Identifying information must be provided
using the cover sheet format in
Appendix A. This sheet must be
completed in full and placed at the
beginning of the proposal.
8
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit
Page lZ of 4(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
2. Proposed Program Narrative
A program narrative must be provided
that separately identifies and addresses
each of items a through d below:
a. Program Description
The proposed program to be paid in full,
or in part, by the grant must be
described. The description should
reveal the underlying logic of the
program, by explaining the relationships
between the activities that comprise the
program and how these events can be
expected to further the program goals.
The description should be presented in
a way that helps stakeholders such as
board members, administrators, staff,
evaluators, funding agencies, advocacy
groups, citizens, and elected officials to
understand and communicate about the
program.
For applicants interested in learning
more about program logic, a good
introduction is provided in Program
Action - Logic Model, published by the
University of Wisconsin Extension Office
of Program Development and
Evaluation (16).
For the program description, applicants
must specify the:
i) Program Category (1 through 4)
under which the proposal falls.
ii) Name of and source information for
the evidence-based program or best
practices guidelines to be replicated,
if any, and the rationale for
proposing the use of this program or
these guidelines.
iii) Goals of the program, or general
statements of what the program is
intended to accomplish for the target
population(s). The goals must be
consistent with the goals and funding
priorities of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program.
iv) Inputs, such as staff, volunteers,
time, financial resources, materials,
and equipment to be used to deliver
the program.
v) Outputs, such as the number and
characteristics of the individuals to
be served, and the types, amount,
and quality of services to be
delivered or activities to be carried
out in the program.
vi) Short / mid-term outcome objectives,
or the measurable changes that can
be expected to further the goals of
the program, such as anticipated
changes in client knowledge, skills,
attitudes, motivation, behavior,
functioning, and safety.
vii) Implementation timeline, including
planning and development, program
delivery, assessment, and reporting
activities that will take place each
month throughout the anticipated
grant period (up to two years).
Appendix B provides a sample
format to be used for this purpose.
The timeline will be used both in
reviewing the application and as a
benchmark against which to
measure progress during the grant
period.
viii) Applicant agency / organization
experience in delivering similar
programs, new organizational
arrangements that will be involved,
and how the program builds upon or
articulates with programs previously
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
9
Exhibit 1i.
Page 13 of - e~b
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
or currently delivered by the
applicant.
ix) Steps taken to determine the
feasibility of fully replicating the
evidence-based program or best
practices guidelines at the local site
b. Demonstration of Need for the
Program
The services to be delivered through the
proposed program must be unavailable
or inadequate but needed in the
applicant community. Applicants must
substantiate the need for the proposed
program with:
i) Local community-based data
reflecting the scope of the problem
of methamphetamine-affected
women and children.
ii) Local community-based data
reflecting the availability and
adequacy of the proposed program
services for methamphetamine-
affected women and children.
Applicants should develop their
proposed programs through a
collaborative process that involves the
agencies / organizations in their
community that will be impacted by the
proposed program, and must describe
the nature and extent of this
collaborative planning.
Applicants are also expected to
implement their proposed program in a
collaborative context, and use written
agreements that bind agencies /
organizations, case managers, and
service providers. Applicants must
include Memoranda of Understanding
that clearly state the specific roles and
responsibilities of each entity involved.
Non-court applicants must demonstrate
a current or planned working
relationship with an existing drug court
or dependency court in their community.
In communities having a drug court and
a dependency court, applicants are
encouraged to demonstrate current or
planned working relationships with both.
Applicants may submit qualitative
information (such as that from interviews
of clients or other key informants on
barriers to obtaining needed services) to
explain and enrich quantitative data
(such as numbers and characteristics of
individuals needing versus receiving
specific services) that substantiate the
need for the proposed program.
However, qualitative data should not be
the sole justification for the proposal.
c. Evidence of Collaboration in
Planning and Implementation
Collaboration is expected to be an
important factor in the successful
planning and implementation of a
program under all funding priority areas.
10
d. Evidence of Staff Professionalism
and Cultural Competency
The professional preparation and
experience of identified or planned staff
must be described in relation to the
knowledge and skills needed to work
specifically with methamphetamine-
affected women and children, to deliver
trauma-informed services, and to deliver
the core components of the program.
Applicants proposing to use an
evidence-based program or best
practices guidelines must describe the
preparation and experience of staff
specific to that program or those
guidelines, or the need for staff training.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit- _
Page _i _q_ of 41e
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
The preparation and experience of
identified or planned staff must also be
described in relation to ability to meet
the service needs of the culturally and
otherwise diverse populations in the
community. These populations may
include, but are not limited to, those who
are cultural / ethnic minorities, racial
minorities, non-English speaking,
migrant farm workers, physically or
mentally impaired, and lesbian /
homosexual / bisexual. Developing and
implementing culturally competent
services may take time, collaboration,
and training, and should be accounted
for in the program timeline as needed.
Plans for professional and / or cultural
competency training should be
described. Such training is an allowable
expense under the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program, and may be included in the
budget.
3. Plan for Assessing Program
Implementation and Monitoring
Program Outputs
CJSD anticipates that the maximum
two-year period of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program will limit the amount of
evaluation that can successfully be
completed during the funding period.
New programs need time to develop
and implement, and no program is fairly
or accurately evaluated before it is fully
and well implemented. Therefore, the
required evaluation component of this
grant will focus on assessing program
implementation and monitoring program
outputs. This focus will enable grantees
to gather information that will help them
best develop and refine their programs,
report adequately to CJSD on progress
during the funding period, and lay the
foundation that is essential for
evaluating outcomes as the program
continues beyond the period of this
grant.
Applicants must submit a plan for
program implementation assessment
with output monitoring, and are
encouraged to use a contracted
evaluation consultant or staff member
experienced in evaluation to develop the
plan and serve as lead evaluator during
the grant period. The implementation
assessment should be designed to
document the resources, context,
activities, and operations involved in the
delivery of the program. The output
monitoring should be designed to
describe the individuals being served by
the program and detail the services that
they receive.
The assessment / monitoring plan
should also be designed with an eye
toward modifying the program to best
target the stated goals and objectives of
the program. This should include
examining the extent to which the
program as implemented matches the
program as intended, examining the
extent to which the outputs produced
match the outputs intended (per
VII.B.2.a above), and identifying and
solving problems related to
implementation and outputs.
The assessment / monitoring plan
should include multiple data collection
methods (such as program records,
surveys, interviews, and observations)
and multiple sources of data (such as
program administrators, service
providers, other staff, and clients). The
use of simple quantitative scales along
with rich, textural descriptions provide
the best information for this purpose.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
11
Exhibit 7
Page S _ of_ 4 l0
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Applicants should consult publications /
internet sources for information on
methods of implementation assessment
and performance measurement. Two
relatively short, introductory publications
that may be helpful are How to Assess
Program Implementation (17) and
Measuring the Performance of Human
Service Programs (18).
The implementation assessment /
output monitoring plan should specify
the:
i) Types of implementation and
output data to be collected.
ii) Collection schedule for each type
of implementation and output data
iii) Existing and newly planned
sources for each type of
implementation and output data,
including confirmation of access to
or ability to develop these sources.
iv) Previous experience of the
applicant agency / organization in
collecting, analyzing, and reporting
program data, and the
administrative and other
arrangements that will need to be
made in order to successfully
complete the assessment /
monitoring.
v) Affiliation, training, and experience
of a contracted consultant or
program staff member who will
serve as lead evaluator and be
responsible for data collection,
analysis, and reporting throughout
the grant period.
vi) Opportunities for program
stakeholders (such as program
administrators, collaborating
agencies / organizations, case
managers, and service providers),
to provide input into and receive
information resulting from the
assessment / monitoring.
vii) Anticipated expenses related to
assessment / monitoring. A
minimum of ten percent of the total
budget must be allocated for these
activities, and applicants should be
careful not to underestimate the
costs of successfully completing
these activities during the grant
period. An estimate of the amount
of time or percent of Full Time
Equivalent to be dedicated to
assessment / monitoring by the
lead evaluator should also be
noted. These costs must also be
detailed in the proposed budget.
To the extent appropriate to their
programs, grantees will also be
expected to contribute relevant data to
the Oregon Treatment Court
Management System. A brief overview
of this system is provided in Appendix
C.
While applicants are expected to identify
their own lead evaluator, CJSD may
provide evaluation technical assistance
after an award has been made to
finalize the elements of the assessment
/ monitoring plan.
12
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit 1
Page ((p of A Cp
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
4. Proposed Budget Worksheet and
Budget Narrative
A detailed budget must be prepared
using the format of the Budget
Worksheet provided in Appendix D. The
Budget Worksheet must be placed at
the beginning of this section of the
proposal, and followed by a Budget
Narrative that explains the need for
each item.
Categories of expenses included on the
Budget Worksheet are personnel
salaries, contractual / consultant
services, rent and utilities, supplies,
travel / training / conferences,
equipment, administration, evaluation,
and other expenses that do not fall
under one of the above categories.
As stated in the guidelines for the Plan
for Assessing Program Implementation
and Monitoring Program Outputs,
applicants are required to allocate a
minimum of ten percent of the total
budget for these purposes.
The Budget Worksheet must show how
the cost of each item was calculated,
and must account for grant funds
requested in this application, match
funds, and all other sources of funds to
be used for the proposed program.
the total available funds for the program
would be $266,667.
Federal funds, in-kind services, and
other non-cash contributions may not be
used to fulfill the match requirement.
Match and grant funds both constitute
program funds, and all conditions that
apply to grant funds also apply to match
funds. All funds designated as match
are restricted to the same uses as grant
funds and must be expended within the
grant period. Grantees must ensure
that match funds are identified in a
manner that guarantees their
accountability during an audit. If state
funds are used for the purposes of the
match requirement, a letter of support
from the County must be included with a
statement that services will not be
decreased to the general population in
order to support the program.
All or part of the 25 percent match
requirement of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program may be fulfilled with funds
received for that purpose from the Drug
Court Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program. Applicants proposing to
fulfill the match requirement in this
manner must state this at the beginning
of the Budget Narrative.
As noted on page two of this RFP, at
least 25 percent of the total program
budget must be in the form of a cash
match to the funds awarded through the
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction
Grant Program. Match funds can be
calculated by dividing the requested
grant amount by three. For example, a
grant request of $200,000 would require
match funds of $66,667. If the grant
funds and the match funds constitute
the total available funds for the program,
5. Plan to Identify Continuation
Funding
Since the intent of the Byrne Formula
Grant Program in Oregon is to initiate
potentially sustainable programs,
applicants must describe their plan to
identify sources of continuation funding
for the proposed program. Continuation
funding can be sought through
reallocation of resources internal to the
administering agency and / or through
external sources (such as federal, state,
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
13
Exhibit _d
Page of _ lrp
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
local, or foundation). A program that
has well documented implementation
and ouputs will have the best chance of
obtaining continuation support.
VIII. Application Review and Award
Decisions
A. Review Process
CJSD will oversee an impartial review of
all applications received by 5:00 PM on
Monday, April 3, 2006. Each application
will initially be examined for
responsiveness to the guidelines
provided in this RFP related to
timeliness, page length and format, and
contents. An application will be deemed
non-responsive if it is submitted late,
exceeds 15 pages (plus five pages of
appendices), does not conform to the
margin and font requirements, or has a
missing or incomplete Cover Sheet,
Proposed Program Narrative, Plan for
Assessing Program Implementation and
Monitoring Program Outcomes,
Proposed Budget Worksheet and
Narrative, or Plan to Identify
Continuation Funding. Only those
applications deemed responsive will be
considered for further review.
The Governor's Drug and Violent Crime
Advisory Board will assist CJSD in
making grant award recommendations.
All applications that are deemed
responsive to the guidelines will be
scored by CJSD and members of the
Advisory Board. Applications will be
scored based on a maximum of 100
points. The possible maximum score for
each application section will be as
follows:
14
■ 55 points - Proposed Program
Narrative
➢ 25 points - Program
Description
➢ 10 points - Demonstration of
Need for the Program
➢ 10 points - Evidence of
Collaboration in Planning and
Implementation
➢ 10 points - Evidence of Staff
Professional and Cultural
Competency
■ 20 points - Plan for Assessing
Program Implementation and
Monitoring Program Outputs
■ 15 points - Proposed Budget
Worksheet and Budget Narrative
■ 10 points- Plan to Identify
Continuation Funding
The geographical distribution of
applicants with the highest scores may
also be considered during the review
process.
B. Award Decisions
The grant award recommendations will
be forwarded to the Governor, who will
then make final award decisions. CJSD
will send decision letters by postal mail
to the name and address of the Program
Director indicated on the cover sheet of
the application on or about June 1,
2006.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit
Page t a
of c} (P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
IX. Award Conditions
A. State Administering Agency Award
Conditions
Grantees of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program must agree to the following
grant award conditions set forth by
CJSD.
1. Monitoring
CJSD will monitor whether grantees are
operating their programs as described in
their approved applications, working
toward their program goals and outcome
objectives as described in their
approved applications or as modified in
collaboration with CJSD, and following
appropriate fiscal procedures. To assist
CJSD in this process, grantees must
submit regularly scheduled progress
reports and participate in periodic
communications and occasional site
visits with CJSD.
2. Progress Reports
Grantees must submit quarterly, annual,
and cumulative program progress
reports as scheduled. Progress reports
must include:
i) Data and narrative information on
program activities conducted,
evaluation activities completed, and
progress made toward furthering the
approved program goals and
outcome objectives during the period
covered by the report, and in relation
to the implementation timeline
proposed by the applicant (per
VI1.B.2.a above).
ii) A description of problems
encountered during the reporting
period in conducting program
activities, implementing the
evaluation plan, or furthering the
goals and objectives of the program,
and the steps taken to solve these
problems.
In addition to assisting CJSD in
monitoring grantee programs, progress
reports may be used by CJSD to assist
other agencies undertaking similar
programs, to justify continued funding of
the Edward Byrne Memorial State and
Local Law Enforcement Assistance
Program, and to provide information to
such entities as the Governor's Office,
Legislature, DOJ / BJA, and Congress.
3. Requests for Reimbursement
Reimbursements will be made to
grantees only for goods or services
identified in the approved application
budget, and only for actual expenses
incurred during the grant period. All
requests for reimbursement must
include supporting documentation to
substantiate claims of expenses
incurred. Payments will be withheld
when any documentation is not provided
and / or any progress report is
outstanding. Reimbursements will be
made to grantees no more than
quarterly unless otherwise determined
by CJSD.
4. Due Dates for Progress Reports
and Requests for Reimbursement
Progress reports and requests for
reimbursement will be due within 30
days of the end of each quarter of the
grant period as follows:
Quarter: Due Date:
January 1-March 31 April 30
April 1-June 30 July 31
July 1-September 30 October 31
October 1-December 31 January 31
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
15
Exhibit lJ
Page t 9 of _q4
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Annual and cumulative reports will be
due three months following the end of
the reporting period, on September 30
of each year.
5. Grant Suspension or Termination
Following reasonable notice to grantees
and attempts to resolve problems
informally, CJSD may suspend funding
in whole or in part, terminate funding, or
impose another sanction for any of the
following reasons:
Failure of the program to become
operational within 60 days of the
effective date of the grant, with
failure to provide reasons for the
delay and the steps taken to initiate
the program. An extension to 90
days may be allowed only under
unusual circumstances.
Failure of the program to comply
substantially with the requirements
or statutory objectives of the Edward
Byrne Memorial State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance Program
guidelines issued hereunder, or
other provisions of federal law.
■ Failure of the program to make
satisfactory progress toward the
approved goals and objectives.
■ Failure of the program to adhere to
the requirements of the grant award
and standard or special conditions.
■ Proposing or implementing
substantial changes that result in a
program that would not have been
selected if it had been subjected to
the original review of applications.
applicable federal or state statute,
regulation, or guideline.
B. Federal Award Conditions
Grantees of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program must also agree to the
following federal grant award conditions
set forth by DOJ / BJA.
1. Unallowable Costs
Grantees may not use or budget grant
award funds for the following items:
■ Land acquisition.
■ Construction of non-penal or
correctional buildings.
■ Indirect costs.
■ Vehicles.
■ Meals not associated with overnight
travel. An exception is made for
breakfast and dinner as long as the
employee is on travel status for a
minimum of two hours before the
beginning of their regularly
scheduled work shift or after the end
of their regularly scheduled work
shift.
■ Meals provided at conferences or
training seminars.
■ Tips, meal service or related items
(i.e., napkins, plates, forks, spoons,
and knives) beverages, snacks,
candy, food items or bar charges.
■ Failure of the program to comply
substantially with any other
■ Entertainment, honoraria, gifts, gift
certificates, movies, arcades,
recreation, or sporting events.
16
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit
Page 2 0 of (P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
■ Fundraising campaigns, endowment
drives, or solicitation of gifts and
bequests.
■ Personal items such as makeovers,
membership dues, flowers, cards,
social events or promotion of church
attendance.
■ Grant writing.
■ Visas or passport charges.
■ Compensation to federal employees
■ Bonuses or commissions.
■ Military-type equipment such as
armored vehicles, explosive devices,
and other types of hardware,
excluding automatic weapons.
■ Lobbying or attempts to influence
members of Congress, the Oregon
Legislature, City Councils, County
Commissions, or other legislative
bodies.
■ Corporate formation.
This is not intended to be an exhaustive
list of unallowable items. CJSD
reserves the right to modify this list as it
deems necessary. An exception for
some items may be allowed for
residential treatment programs.
2. Supplanting
Grantees must use award funds to
supplement, not supplant, existing
funds. Neither federal grant nor match
funds may replace funds that have
already been appropriated, or would
otherwise be available, for the proposed
program.
3. Drug-Free Work Place, Debarment,
and Lobbying
Grantees must maintain a drug-free
workplace, prohibit the use of federal
grant funds by persons debarred or
suspended from receiving these funds,
and prohibit the use of federal grant
funds for lobbying Members of
Congress.
4. Civil Rights Compliance
Grantees are required to comply with
the nondiscrimination requirements of:
■ Interest, interest on non-bearing
items, or the cost of money.
■ Laundry charges.
■ Expenses related to the
maintenance or sale of forfeited or
seized property.
■ Expenses related to clandestine lab
clean-up.
■ Stipends or incentives.
■ Transportation tax.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §
2000d et seq. (prohibiting
discrimination in programs or
activities on the basis of race, color,
and national origin).
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968, as amended, 42
U.S.C. §3789d(c) (1) (prohibiting
discrimination in employment
practices or in programs and
activities on the basis of race, color,
religion, national origin, and gender).
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
17
Exhibit -D
Page 21 of _4 (Q
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
18
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.
(prohibiting discrimination in
employment practices or in programs
and activities on the basis of
disability).
■ Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §
12131 (prohibiting discrimination in
services, programs, and activities on
the basis of disability).
■ The Age Discrimination Act of 1975,
42 U.S.C. § 6101-07 (prohibiting
discrimination in programs and
activities on the basis of age).
Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C §
1681 et seq. (prohibiting
discrimination in educational
programs or activities on the basis of
gender).
Services to Limited English-
Proficient Persons. National origin
discrimination includes discrimination
on the basis of Limited English
Proficient Persons (LEP). To ensure
compliance with Title VI and the Safe
Streets Act, recipients are required
to take reasonable steps to ensure
that LEP persons have meaningful
access to their programs.
Meaningful access may entail
providing language assistance
services, including oral and written
translation, where necessary. The
U.S. Department of Justice has
issued guidance for grantees to
assist them in complying with Title VI
requirements. The guidance
document can be accessed on the
Internet at www.lep.gov or by
contacting OJP's Office for Civil
Rights at (202) 307-0690.
If required to formulate an Equal
Employment Opportunity Program,
grantees must maintain a current copy
on file that meets the applicable
requirements.
In the event that a court or
administrative agency makes a finding
of discrimination on grounds of race,
color, religion, national origin, gender,
disability, or age against a recipient of
funds after a due process hearing, the
recipient must agree to forward a copy
of the finding to the Office of Civil Rights
of OJP.
5. Single Audit Report
Grantees who expend $500,000 or more
of federal funds during their fiscal year
are required to submit an organization-
wide financial and compliance audit
report.
6. National Environmental Policy Act
Compliance
Prior to obligating grant funds, grantees
are required to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act, by providing
notice to CJSD if any of the following
activities will be related to the use of
these funds:
■ New construction.
■ Minor renovation or remodeling of a
property either (a) listed on or
eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places or (b)
located within a 100-year floodplain.
■ Renovation, lease, or any other
proposed use of a building or facility
that will either (a) result in a change
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit -D
Page 2Z of 4(,o
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
in its basic prior use or (b)
significantly change its size.
Implementation of a new program
involving the use of chemicals other
than chemicals that are (a)
purchased as an incidental
component of a funded activity and
(b) traditionally used, for example, in
office, household, recreational, or
educational environments.
function of a facility, the grantee must
provide CJSD with a full description of
the proposed work. A determination will
then be made as to whether any further
action is necessary. The grantee must
agree to cooperate with any specific
request made by CJSD or DOJ / BJA in
the preparation of an environmental
assessment of the grant funded
program or activity based on the above
criteria.
Most grantees will not be affected by the
National Environmental Policy Act. If,
however a program will involve minor
renovation, construction, or any other
activity that may significantly impact the
environment or a change in the use or
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
19
Exhibit `7i
Page 3 of - 4(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
X. References
(1) Oregon Criminal Justice Commission (2005) Governor's Public Safety Review 2004:
Report to the Governor.
hftp://www.ococ.state.or.us/PSReview/GvrnrPSRvwLegEd2005Ol26.pd
f
(2) Oregon Legislative Assembly (2005) Oregon Meth Package (Enrolled): House Bill
2485; House Bill 5174; House Bill 3457; Senate Bill 907; Senate Bill 5630; Senate Bill
640; and Senate Memorial 3. Updated access to all through:
hftp://www.oregondec.org/legislation/
(3) U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice
Assistance (2005) Edward Byrne Memorial Local Law Enforcement Assistant Grant
Program.
http://www.oip.usdol.gov/BJA/grant/bVrne.html
(4) Oregon Department of Human Services, Office of Mental Health and Addiction
Services (2005) Evidence Based Practices.
http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/mentalhealth/ebp/main.shtml#overview
(5) Oregon Commission on Children and Families (2005) Best Practices.
http://www.oregon.gov/OCCF/Mission/BestPrac/mibest.shtm1
(6) Northwest Frontier Addiction Technology Transfer Center (2005) Evidence-Based
Practices (EBP) Online.
http://www.nfattc.org/EBPOnline.htm
(7) University of California Los Angeles, Integrated Substance Abuse Programs (2005),
Matrix Intensive Outpatient Program for Treatment of Stimulant Abuse, accessed
through the distributor, the Hazelden Foundation, 2005.
http://www.hazelden.org/servlet/hazelden/cros/ptt/hazl 7030 shade html?sh=t&sf=t&page id=2
9787
(8) Najavits, L. Seeking Safety: Psychotherapy for Trauma/PTSD and Substance
Abuse. Harvard Medical School / McLean Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, accessed
2005.
http://www.seekingsafety.org/index.htm
(9) Kaleidoscope Program, Chicago Illinois, Wrap Around: A Treatment Planning
Process, accessed 2005.
http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/mentalhealth/ebp/ap/wraparound.pdf
20
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit
Page 2-q of _ (P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
(10) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (2005)
Treatment Improvement Protocol Series.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fccii?rid=hstat5.part22441
(11) ) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (1998)
Comprehensive Case Management for Substance Abuse Treatment: Treatment
Improvement Protocol Series, Number 27
httl2://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fccii?rid=hstat5.biblist 51329
(12) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (1999)
Treatment Improvement Protocol #33: Treatment for Stimulant Use Disorders
http://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fccii?rid=hstat5.chapter.57310
(13) U.S. Congress (1997) Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. Public Law 105-89.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/useftp.cgi?lPaddress=162.140.64.21 Wilename
=Dubl89.pdf&directorv=/diskc/wais/data/105 Gong public laws
(14) U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice
Assistance (2004) Family Dependency Treatment Courts: Addressing Child Abuse and
Neglect Using the Drug Court Model (Monograph).
http://www.onp.usdo*.gov/BJA/pubs/FamDepMono.pd
f
(15) Oregon Alliance for Drug Endangered Children (2005).
http://www.oregondec.org/
(16) University of Wisconsin Extension Office of Program Development and Evaluation.
Program Action - Logic Model, accessed 2005.
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdand;/progdev/index.html
(17) King, J.A., L.L. Morris, and C.T. Fitz-Gibbon (1987) How to Assess Program
Implementation. Sage Publications: Newbury Park, California.
(18) Martin, L.L. and P.M. Kettner (1996) Measuring the Performance of Human Service
Programs. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, California.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
21
Exhibit ~y
Page _2- 5 of _ 4(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix A
FY 2006-2008 Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
COVER SHEET FORMAT
Program title:
Administering agency:
Total cost of program: $
Federal funds requested:
Required minimum match:
$
Other sources of funding:
Total:
$
Do you also intend to apply for funding from the Drug Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program? Yes F-1 No ❑
If yes, will you be requesting funds to fulfill the federal match requirement
of the Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Program agency (if not Administering agency):
Address:
Program Director:
phone:
Program contact:
phone:
Fiscal contact:
phone:
e-mail address:
fax:
e-mail address:
fax:
Administering Agency Federal Tax Identification Number:
Grant start date: July 1, 2006
Authorized official for the applicant:
Signature of authorized official:
22
Grant end date: June 30, 2007
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
fax:
e-mail address:
Exhibit
Page _(o of lp _
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix B
FY 2006-2008 Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE FORMAT
Month in Program Year 1: FY 2006-2007
Month in Program Year 2: FY 2007-2008
Activity *
J A S O N D J F M A M J
J A IS 10 N D J F M A M J
Program Plannin and
Develo ment
Finalize
Administrative /
Collaborative
Arrangements
Identify / Hire
Staff and
Consultants
Train Staff
Purchase
Equipment and
Supplies
Develop Client
Services
Program Delive
Recruit / Enroll
Clients
Deliver Client
Services
Program Assessment
Test/ Modify
Data Collection
Methods
Develop
Database
Collect Data:
Implementation
Assessment
Collect Data:
Output
Monitoring
Enter Data
Analyze Data
Progress Reports
Submit
Quarterly
Reports
Submit First
Year Annual
Report
Submit Final
Sept
Cumulative
2008
Report
* These activities are examples; applicants may include these and I L
/ or other activities as appropriate.
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
23
Exhibit
Page _2,1_ of _(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix C
OREGON TREATMENT COURT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OVERVIEW
The Oregon Treatment Court Management System (OTCMS) is a user-friendly,
menu-driven data collection and case management information system developed for
treatment courts in Oregon. The system allows users to enter and view demographic,
case management, and post discharge information on participants and store data for
retrieval later. In addition to storing data, users are able to access a host of built-in
reports summarizing case information, individual progress reports, as well as lists of
participants, weekly staffing reports, demographic information, and self-calculating
performance measures.
Creation of the OTCMS began with the approval of the Oregon Judicial
Department (OJD) Management Information System (MIS) Enhancement grant
proposal (Grant # 2000-DC-VX-0090) in September 2001. The former OJD Court
Community Justice Services Division (CCJSD) was approved to manage the MIS
Enhancement grant to complete the goals laid out by the Drug Court Programs Office
(DCPO, now a part of DOJ/BJA). The goals of the MIS Enhancement grant were to
select a database for drug courts and implement it statewide.
The current version of the OTCMS, production version 1.5, is an updated version
of the Oregon Drug Court Management System (Production version 1.4), a Microsoft
Access based program developed from a database utilized by the drug court in Buffalo,
NY. The criteria used to select the database was that it must allow easy, uniform
statewide data collection, and must be able to be implemented within the existing
Oregon Judicial Department structure. Once the database was selected and
developed, initial pilot sites in the Marion, Malheur, and Clackamas counties were
selected to beta test the system. Using the feedback provided by these courts initial
modifications were made to the system before being distributed as a test version to 11
courts in August 2002. Using survey feedback results, a list of priorities was created
and a consultant was commissioned to carry out recommendations identified in the
survey results and conduct site visits with court staff from the Office of the State Court
Administrator (OSCA). The final version was released in December 2002.
In March 2005, The Court Programs & Services Division (CPSD) of the OJD
received a Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (Grant #02-644) to enhance the ODCMS
to make it more applicable and workable for juvenile and family drug courts. Beginning
August 2005, CPSD began distributing the database to Oregon's treatment courts. The
new version, the Oregon Treatment Court Management System, has been renamed to
be more inclusive of all Oregon treatment courts.
* Source: Oregon Judicial Department
24
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit l~
Page 28 of_,4 (p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix D
BUDGET WORKSHEET FORMAT
FY 2006-2008 Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program
PERSONNEL SALARIES
List each position by title, percentage of time devoted to the program
or FTE, annual salary/hourly rate, fringe benefits, and payroll taxes.
CONTRACTUAL/CONSULTANT SERVICES
Provide a brief description of the services to be provided and the
hourly/daily rate and estimated time on program. Consultant fees in
excess of $450/day must receive prior approval.
RENT AND UTILITIES
Itemize by type (rent, telephone, pager, janitorial services) and
monthly rate.
SUPPLIES
Generally, supplies are items that have a useful life less than one
year. List supplies by type, quantity, and unit cost.
TRAVEL/TRAINING/ CONFERENCES
Itemize travel expenses such as conference registration fees, meals
(or per diem), lodging, airfare, mileage, tolls, commercial
transportation, and parking fees. Make sure travel expenses are
documented in sufficient detail (dates/times/receipts/brief description
of the purpose of the trip and for how many people). Be sure to
obtain prior approval for out-of-state travel.
EQUIPMENT
Generally, equipment is tangible personal property costing over
$5,000 and having a useful life of more than one year. Specify type,
quantity, and unit cost.
ADMINISTRATION
Administrative costs may not exceed ten percent of the total grant
and will be approved on a case-by-case basis. Itemize costs such
as accounting, payroll, etc.
EVALUATION
Itemize expenses related to the development and implementation of
evaluation data collection and analysis
OTHER EXPENSES
Itemize expenses that do not readily fit into any of the other budget
categories (such as direct client services)
TOTAL EXPENSES
* Itemize all other sources and amounts of funding.
Grant Match Other
Request Amount Funding* Total
Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program 25
Criminal Justice Services Division
Exhibit ID
Page 2-3 _of _+(,e_
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
DRUG COURT IMPLEMENTATION
and
ENHANCEMENT GRANT PROGRAM
26
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit D,
Page 0 of _4 to
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Drug Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program
drug court implementation or
enhancement grant.
1. State Administering Agency
The Criminal Justice Commission's
(CJC) purpose is to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of state and
local criminal justice systems by
providing a centralized and impartial
forum for statewide policy development
and planning. The commission is
charged with developing a long-range
public safety plan for Oregon, which
includes making recommendations on
the capacity and use of state prisons
and local jails, implementation of
community corrections programs and
methods to reduce future criminal
conduct. In addition, the Commission
has a role in funding and evaluating
Oregon's drug courts. The commission
also conducts research, develops
impact estimates of crime-related
legislation, acts as a statistical and data
clearinghouse, administers Oregon's
felony sentencing guidelines and
provides staff to the advisory
committees regarding asset forfeiture
and racial profiling.
The 2004-05 Oregon Legislature
authorized $2,500,000 in funds for drug
court grants under a process to be
designed, implemented and
administered by the CJC. The intent of
the Oregon Legislature in implementing
ORS 137.656 (HB 2485) was to develop
new drug courts and to expand existing
drug court operations. These grants are
intended to expand capacity and are not
to be used to supplant or replace
existing funds for drug court operations.
Grant funds are to be primarily used to
fund treatment capacity and court
coordinators. Eligible applicants may
apply for an Adult, Juvenile or Family
11. Availability and Duration of
Funding
A total of $2,500,000 will be distributed
through the Drug Court Implementation
and Enhancement Grant Program
during fiscal year 2006-2007. This is a
one-time solicitation, offering support for
a maximum period of 12 months for
enhancement and implementation
grants. The maximum grant amount
may not exceed $300,000. First year
funding is expected to begin July 1,
2006.
III. Grant Program Goals
The goal of the Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program is to carry out the intent
of the Oregon Legislature in
implementing ORS 137.656 (HB 2485)
to develop new drug courts and to
expand existing drug court operations to
address the problem of
methamphetamine use in Oregon. Drug
courts have been shown to be a cost-
effective way to increase engagement
and completion of chemical dependency
treatment, reduce criminal recidivism,
reduce alcohol and drug use, and
impact many other public systems.
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
27
Exhibit_-_ DI
Page 31 of 4(P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
IV. Eligible Applicants
Applicants eligible under the Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program include existing drug
courts, existing dependency courts,
counties, other units of local
government, or judicial districts.
processes and procedures. All grant
applications will be forwarded to the
Oregon Judicial Department (OJD)
Grant Coordinator. Applicants may
contact the OJD Grant Coordinator, who
has program coordination insight and
may serve as a resource for grant
compliance.
Applications must be completed by an
entire drug court team consisting of at
least the judge, court administrator,
district attorney, public defender, sheriff,
community corrections agency (or
juvenile department), and treatment
provider. All of these entities are
required to demonstrate support for the
project by signing off on the application.
Applications can be for multi-county
regions if appropriate. Drug court teams
may be currently functioning teams or
formed for the purpose of applying for
this grant. Functioning drug court
programs must demonstrate that grant
funds will not replace or supplant
existing funds.
Although more than one agency /
organization will be involved in the
implementation of a successful grant
application, a lead entity (or entities)
must represent the applicant and must
accept responsibility for program and
fiscal record keeping and reporting.
Eligible substance abuse treatment
providers must hold a current, non-
provisional license/letter of approval
issued by the Office of Mental Health
and Addiction Services (OMHAS). A
copy of this license/letter must be
provided as part of the application.
Treatment court teams seeking a Drug
Court Grant must engage in any
required agency or department grant
Potential applicants are encouraged to
submit a letter of intent to apply for a
Drug Court Grant to CJC by February
28, 2006.
V. Funding Priorities
A. Rationale
The funding priorities for the Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program are based on research
that has shown that drug courts are an
effective method of engaging drug
addicted offenders of medium to high
risk of recidivism in treatment, while
holding them accountable and
protecting public safety through
intensive supervision. Research
indicates that drug court participants
tend to have longer treatment stays,
higher completion rates, and lower
recidivism and drug use than those who
access treatment as part of traditional
probation. Grant funds are to be
primarily used to fund treatment
capacity and court coordinators.
28
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit _ _
Page ? of _4 b
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
B. Eligible Program Categories
Two categories of funding are available
under this solicitation. Category 1
targets drug court implementation
grants. Category 2 targets drug court
enhancement grants. Applicants may
apply for funding to support the
implementation or enhancement of an
adult, juvenile or family drug court.
Category 1
Drug court implementation grants are
available to any jurisdiction that has
completed a substantial amount of
planning, developed a plan, and is ready
to implement a drug court. Programs
funded by the Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program are required to target
substance abusing offenders and must
implement a drug court based on the 10
Key Components of Drug Courts, as
described in the publication Defining
Drug Courts: The Key Components (1).
Priority will be given to those drug court
programs targeting offenders who are at
medium to high risk to re-offend and
populations with a high severity of
addiction.
Category 2
Drug court enhancement grants are
available to any jurisdiction that already
has a fully operational drug court and
wants to expand capacity. Applicants
applying for enhancement grants must
demonstrate that these services will
either expand the population served or
add services that are not currently
offered. As mentioned above, grant
funds may not be used to replace or
supplant existing funds or resources.
Drug courts must demonstrate a
compelling need for additional state
funding. In addition, applicants for drug
court enhancement grants are strongly
encouraged to describe the
effectiveness of their current programs
through evaluation findings.
VI. Recommended Approach
Applicants must be able to demonstrate
adherence to the 10 Key Components of
Drug Courts. Treatment providers must
also utilize evidence-based practices
within their programs. OMHAS has
developed a definition for evidence-
based practices that will be used for the
purposes of this application. OMHAS
defines evidence-based practices as
programs or practices that effectively
integrate the best research evidence
with clinical expertise, cultural
competence and the values of the
persons receiving the services. These
programs or practices have consistent
scientific evidence showing improved
outcomes for clients, participants or
communities. CJC will recognize
practices that have been approved by
OMHAS (2). Practices utilized must be
targeted to the population served and
have been shown to reduce alcohol and
drug use and criminal recidivism.
Some examples of evidence-based
practices that have been identified by
OMHAS that are appropriate to this RFP
are the Matrix Intensive Outpatient
Program for the Treatment of Stimulant
Abuse (3), developed by the Integrated
Substance Abuse Programs at the
University of California, Los Angeles,
and Seeking Safety (4), developed at
Harvard Medical School / McLean
Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.
Applicants should consider other
evidence-based practices on the
OMHAS approved list as well.
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
29
Exhibit
Page _3 3,_ of _Cp
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Applicants proposing the use of an
evidence-based program should
carefully consider the feasibility of
replicating the selected program at the
local site, in terms of whether the
specific administrative, staffing, training,
and service delivery (core components
and dosage) requirements can be met.
Applicants selected for funding will be
expected to demonstrate fidelity
(adherence) to the program, and may
benefit from contacting the program
developer prior to submitting the
proposal to gather information on how
this might best be achieved.
VII. Application Instructions and
Requirements
A. Application Length and Format
Applications should consist of the Cover
Sheet, Proposed Program Narrative,
Plan for Assessing Program
Implementation and Monitoring Program
Participants, Proposed Budget
Worksheet and Narrative, and Ability to
Leverage Other Funds and Cost-
Effectiveness of the Proposed Program.
Applications must not exceed fifteen
pages, exclusive of the cover sheet, and
have a maximum additional seven
pages of appendices. No part of
sections VII.B.1 through 5 may be
submitted as an appendix.
Applications must be submitted on
single-sided, 8'/2 x 11-inch paper, using
one-inch margins, and typed double
spaced with a standard 12-point font.
30
B. Application Contents
1. Cover Sheet
Identifying information must be provided
using the cover sheet format in
Appendix A. This sheet must be
completed in full and placed at the
beginning of the proposal.
2. Proposed Program Narrative
A program narrative must be provided
that separately identifies and addresses
items a through d below:
a. Program Description
The proposed program to be paid in full,
or in part, by the grant must be
described. The description should
reveal the underlying logic of the
program. For applicants interested in
learning more about program logic, a
good introduction is provided in Program
Action - Logic Model, published by the
University of Wisconsin Extension Office
of Program Development and
Evaluation (5). The description should
be presented in a way that helps
stakeholders such as board members,
administrators, staff, evaluators, funding
agencies, advocacy groups, citizens,
and elected officials to understand and
communicate about the program.
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit
Page ~ of 4(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
For each program, the applicants must
specify the:
i) Program Category (Implementation
or Enhancement) under which the
proposal falls.
ii) Ways in which adherence to the 10
Key Components of Drug Courts will
be accomplished.
iii) Name of the evidence-based
practices to be replicated, and the
rationale for proposing the use of
these practices.
iv) Goals of the program, or general
statements of what the program is
intended to accomplish for the target
population(s). The goals must be
consistent with the goals and funding
priorities of the CJC Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program.
v) Inputs, such as staff, volunteers,
time, financial resources, materials,
and equipment to be used to deliver
the program. Applicants seeking
Category 2 enhancement grants
must clearly and specifically describe
how grant funds will increase inputs,
rather than replacing or supplanting
existing inputs.
increase outputs.
vii) Short / mid-term outcome objectives,
or the measurable changes that can
be expected to further the goals of
the program, such as anticipated
changes in client knowledge, skills,
attitudes, motivation, behavior,
functioning, and safety.
viii) Implementation timeline, including
planning and development, program
delivery, assessment, and reporting
activities that will take place
throughout the anticipated grant
period. Appendix B provides a
sample format to be used for this
purpose. The timeline will be used
both in reviewing the application and
as a benchmark against which to
measure progress during the grant
period.
ix) Applicant agency / organization
experience in delivering similar
programs, new organizational
arrangements that will be involved,
and how the program builds upon or
is informed by programs previously
or currently delivered by the
applicant.
x) Steps taken to determine the
feasibility of fully replicating the
evidence-based practices at the local
site.
vi) Outputs, such as the number and
characteristics of the individuals to
be served and completing the
program, and the types, amount, and
quality of services to be delivered or
activities to be carried out in the
program. Applicants seeking
Category 2 enhancement grants
must describe how grant funds will
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
31
Exhibit Di
Page 35 of .4
(P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
b. Demonstration of Need for the
Program
The services to be delivered through the
proposed program must be unavailable
or inadequate to serve the needs of the
community that the drug court is to
serve. Applicants must substantiate the
need for the proposed program with:
i) Local community-based data
reflecting the numbers of offenders
on probation that would otherwise
be eligible for the drug court
program and other measures of
community need.
ii) Applicant and / or collaborating
agency / organization service
record data reflecting the
availability and adequacy of the
proposed program services.
Applicants may submit qualitative
information (such as that from interviews
of clients or other key informants on
barriers to obtaining needed services) to
explain and enrich quantitative data
(such as numbers and characteristics of
individuals needing versus receiving
specific services) that substantiate the
need for the proposed program.
However, qualitative data should not be
the sole justification for the proposal.
proposed program, and must describe
the nature and extent of this
collaborative planning.
Applicants are also expected to
implement their proposed program in a
collaborative context, and must include
Memoranda of Understanding that
clearly state the specific roles and
responsibilities of each entity involved.
Eligible entities must receive letters of
support from the Local Public Safety
Coordinating Council (LPSCC) and
Local Alcohol and Drug Planning
Council (LADPC) and include these as
appendices to the application.
d. Evidence of Staff Competency
The professional preparation and
experience of identified or planned staff
must be described in relation to the
knowledge and skills needed to work
specifically with drug court participants.
Applicants proposing to use evidence-
based practices must describe the
preparation and experience of staff
specific to those practices. All treatment
services must be delivered by Certified
Alcohol and Drug Counselors (CADC) or
other licensed staff with specialized
training in addiction treatment.
c. Evidence of Collaboration in
Planning and Implementation
Collaboration is expected to be an
important factor in the successful
planning and implementation of a
program under both funding priority
areas. Applicants should develop their
proposed programs through a
collaborative process that involves the
agencies / organizations in their
community that will be impacted by the
32
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit
Page 3 ( of .4(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
3. Plan for Assessing Program
Implementation and Monitoring
Program Participants
Applicants must describe how they will
assess the following aspects of program
implementation on an ongoing basis:
i) Use of the 10 Key Components
of Drug Courts.
ii) Fidelity (adherence) to the
selected evidence-based
practices, in terms of whether the
specific administrative, staffing,
training, and service delivery
(core components and dosage)
requirements are being met.
Applicants must also describe how they
will monitor program participants by
collecting and submitting the following
data on a quarterly basis:
iii) Demographic, case management
and post-discharge data using
the Oregon Treatment Court
Management System (OTCMS).
An overview of the OTCMS is
provided in Appendix C. These
data will be used to assess
funded programs in relation to the
Drug Court Performance
Measures developed and
adopted by the Chief Justice
Advisory Committee on
Treatment Courts (as described
in Appendix E). Additional
outcome reporting requirements
may be required by CJC.
iv) Adult participant recidivism risk at
program entry using the Oregon
Department of Corrections Risk
Classification System or the
Level of Service Inventory (LSI-
R). This classification requires
access to criminal history records
and is usually completed by the
Community Corrections agency.
These data should also be used
to guide individual treatment
plans. This requirement applies
only to adult criminal courts.
Any costs of evaluation should be
included in this section of the grant
application. Costs may include training
not sponsored by CJC, computer
equipment, and staff time.
4. Proposed Budget Worksheet
and Budget Narrative
A detailed budget must be prepared
using the format of the Budget
Worksheet provided in Appendix D. The
Budget Worksheet must be placed at
the beginning of this section of the
proposal, and followed by a Budget
Narrative that explains the need for
each item.
Categories of expenses included on the
Budget Worksheet are personnel
salaries, contractual / consultant
services, rent and utilities, supplies,
travel / training / conferences,
equipment, administration, evaluation,
and other expenses that do not fall
under one of the above categories.
The Budget Worksheet must show how
the cost of each item was calculated,
and must account for grant funds
requested in this application and all
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
33
Exhibit __i)
Page 3r7 of _4(P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
other sources of funds to be used for the
proposed program.
5. Ability to Leverage Other Funds
and Cost-Effectiveness of the
Proposed Program
All or part of the 25 percent match
requirement of the Byrne
Methamphetamine Reduction Grant
Program may be fulfilled with funds
received for that purpose from this CJC
Drug Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program. Funding
priority may also go to programs that
leverage other funds from federal, local,
or private sources.
Criminal recidivism research has
indicated that interventions targeted to
medium or high risk offenders generate
the most substantial effects. This
research will be considered in
determining the cost-effectiveness of the
program.
In addition, applicants should explore
having drug court participants pay for a
portion of treatment costs in order to
stretch limited resources.
VIII. Application Review and Award
Decisions
A. Review Process
CJC will oversee an impartial review of
all applications received by 5:00 PM on
Monday April 3, 2006. Each application
will initially be examined for
responsiveness to the guidelines
provided in this RFP related to
timeliness, page length and format, and
contents. An application will be deemed
non-responsive if it is submitted late,
exceeds 15 pages (plus 7 pages of
34
appendices), does not conform to the
margin and font requirements, or has a
missing or incomplete Cover Sheet,
Proposed Program Narrative, Plan for
Assessing Program Implementation and
Monitoring Program Participants,
Proposed Budget Worksheet and
Narrative, or Ability to Leverage Other
Funds and Cost-Effectiveness of the
Proposed Program. Only those
applications deemed responsive will be
considered for further review.
All applications that are deemed
responsive to the guidelines will be
scored by CJC and a Drug Court
Advisory Board. Applications will be
scored based on a maximum of 100
points. The possible maximum score for
each application section will be as
follows:
■ 60 points - Proposed Program
Narrative
➢ 25 points -Program
Description
➢ 15 points - Demonstration of
Need for the Program
➢ 15 points - Evidence of
Collaboration in Planning and
Implementation
➢ 5 points - Evidence of Staff
Competency
10 points - Plan for Assessing
Program Implementation and
Monitoring Program Participants
■ 15 points - Proposed Budget
Worksheet and Budget Narrative
■ 15 points_ Ability to Leverage Other
Funds and Cost-Effectiveness of the
Proposed Program
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit
Page 3 of. 44?
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
The geographical distribution of
applicants with the highest scores may
also be considered during the review
process.
2. Progress Reports
Grantees must submit quarterly and
cumulative program progress reports as
scheduled. Progress reports must
include:
B. Award Decisions
The grant award recommendations will
be forwarded to the CJC, who will then
make final award decisions. CJC will
send decision letters to all applicants by
postal mail to the name and address of
the Program Director indicated on the
cover sheet of the application on or
about June 1, 2006.
IX. Award Conditions
A. State Administering Agency
Award Conditions
Grantees of the Drug Court
Implementation and Enhancement
Grant Program must agree to the
following grant award conditions set
forth by CJC.
1. Monitoring
CJC will monitor whether grantees are
operating their programs as described in
their approved applications, working
toward their program goals and outcome
objectives as described in their
approved applications or as modified in
collaboration with CJC, and following
appropriate fiscal procedures. To assist
CJC in this process, grantees must
submit regularly scheduled progress
reports and participate in periodic
communications and occasional site
visits by CJC.
i) Data and narrative information on
program activities conducted,
evaluation activities completed, and
progress made toward furthering the
approved program goals and
outcome objectives during the period
covered by the report, and in relation
to the implementation timeline
proposed by the applicant.
ii) A description of problems
encountered during the reporting
period in conducting program
activities, implementing the
evaluation plan, or furthering the
goals and objectives of the program,
and the steps taken to solve these
problems.
In addition to assisting CJC in
monitoring grantee programs, progress
reports may be used by CJC to assist
other agencies undertaking similar
programs, to justify continued funding of
the Drug Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program, and to
provide information to such entities as
the Governor's Office and the
Legislature.
3. Requests for Reimbursement
Reimbursements will be made to
grantees only for goods or services
identified in the approved application
budget, and only for actual expenses
incurred during the grant period. All
requests for reimbursement must
include supporting documentation to
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
35
Exhibit
Page 9 of _4.(.Q
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
substantiate claims of expenses
incurred. Payments will be withheld
when any documentation is not provided
and / or any progress report is
outstanding. Reimbursements will be
made to grantees no more than
quarterly unless otherwise determined
by CJC.
Failure of the program to become
operational within 60 days of the
effective date of the grant, with
failure to provide reasons for the
delay and the steps taken to initiate
the program. An extension to 90
days may be allowed only under
unusual circumstances.
4. Due Dates for Progress Reports
and Requests for Reimbursement
Progress reports and requests for
reimbursement will be due within 30
days of the end of each quarter of the
grant period as follows:
Quarter: Due Date:
January 1-March 31 April 30
April 1-June 30 July 31
July 1-September 30 October 31
October 1-December 31 January 31
Cumulative reports will be due three
months following the end of the
reporting period, on September 30 of
each year.
5. Grant Suspension or
Termination
Following reasonable notice to grantees
and attempts to resolve problems
informally, CJC may suspend funding in
whole or in part, terminate funding, or
impose another sanction for any of the
following reasons:
Failure of the program to comply
substantially with the requirements
or statutory objectives of the Drug
Court Implementation and
Enhancement Grant Program
guidelines issued hereunder, or
other provisions of state law.
■ Failure of the program to make
satisfactory progress toward the
approved goals and objectives.
■ Failure of the program to adhere to
the requirements of the grant award
and standard or special conditions.
■ Proposing or implementing
substantial changes that result in a
program that would not have been
selected if it had been subjected to
the original review of applications.
■ Failure of the program to comply
substantially with any other
applicable federal or state statute,
regulation, or guideline.
36
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit --1)
Page AO of (P
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
X. References
(1) US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. (1997). Defining Drug
Courts: The Key Components.
www.offir).usdoo.gov/BJA/qrant/DruqCourts/DefininciDC.i)df.
(2) Oregon Department of Human Services, Office of Mental Health and Addiction
Services (2005) Evidence Based Practices.
http://www.ore-gon.gov/DHS/mentalhealth/ebp/main.shtml#overview
(3) University of California Los Angeles, Integrated Substance Abuse Programs (2005),
Matrix Intensive Outpatient Program for Treatment of Stimulant Abuse, accessed
through the distributor, the Hazelden Foundation, 2005.
http://www.hazelden.org/servlet/hazelden/cros/ptt/hazi 7030 shade html?sh=t&sf=t&page id=2
9787
(4) Najavits, L. Seeking Safety: Psychotherapy for Trauma/PTSD and Substance
Abuse. Harvard Medical School / McLean Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, accessed
2005.
http://www.seekingsafety.org/index.htm
(5) University of Wisconsin Extension Office of Program Development and Evaluation.
Program Action - Logic Model, accessed 2005.
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/i)rocidev/index.html
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program 37
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit --D
Page A I of tE(p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix E
FY 2006-2007 Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
COVER SHEET FORMAT
Program title:
Administering agency:
Total cost of program:
Federal funds requested:
Required minimum match:
Other sources of funding:
Total:
Do you also intend to apply for funding from the Byrne Methamphetamine
Reduction Grant Program? Yes❑ No ❑
If yes, will requested funds be used to fulfill the federal match requirement
of the Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Program agency (if not Administering agency):
Address:
Program Director:
phone:
Program contact:
phone:
Fiscal contact:
phone:
e-mail address:
fax:
e-mail address:
fax:
e-mail address:
fax:
Administering Agency Federal Tax Identification Number:
Grant start date: July 1, 2006
Authorized official for the applicant:
Signature of authorized official:
Grant end date: June 30, 2007
38
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit _L)
Page _62, of 4T
p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix F
FY 2006-2007 Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE FORMAT
l onth in Program Year 1: FY 2006-2007 Month in Program Year 2: FY 2007-2008
Activity *
A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J
Hi
Program Planning and
De lopment
Finalize
Administrative /
Collaborative
Arran ements
Identify / Hire
Staff and
Consultants
Train Staff
Purchase
Equipment and
Supplies
Develop Client
Services
-Program Delive
Recruit / Enroll
Clients
Deliver Client
Services
Program Assessment
Test / Modify
Data Collection
Methods
Develop
:
Database
Collect Data:
Implementation
Assessment
Collect Data:
Participant
Monitorin
Enter Data
Analyze Data
.Progress Repo s
Submit
I
1
Quarterly
Reports
E
E
E
Submit First
Year Annual
Report
Submit Final
I
Cumulative
Report
E
* These activities are examples; applicants may include these and / or other activities as appropriate.
I = Implementation grant; E = Enhancement grant.
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
39
Exhibit T_
Page A of 4-(.
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix G
OREGON TREATMENT COURT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OVERVIEW
The Oregon Treatment Court Management System (OTCMS) is a user-friendly,
menu-driven data collection and case management information system developed for
treatment courts in Oregon. The system allows users to enter and view demographic,
case management, and post discharge information on participants and store data for
retrieval later. In addition to storing data, users are able to access a host of built-in
reports summarizing case information, individual progress reports, as well as lists of
participants, weekly staffing reports, demographic information, and self-calculating
performance measures.
Creation of the OTCMS began with the approval of the Oregon Judicial
Department (OJD) Management Information System (MIS) Enhancement grant
proposal (Grant # 2000-DC-VX-0090) in September 2001. The former OJD Court
Community Justice Services Division (CCJSD) was approved to manage the MIS
Enhancement grant to complete the goals laid out by the Drug Court Programs Office
(DCPO, now a part of DOJ/BJA). The goals of the MIS Enhancement grant were to
select a database for drug courts and implement it statewide.
The current version of the OTCMS, production version 1.5, is an updated version
of the Oregon Drug Court Management System (Production version 1.4), a Microsoft
Access based program developed from a database utilized by the drug court in Buffalo,
NY. The criteria used to select the database was that it must allow easy, uniform
statewide data collection, and must be able to be implemented within the existing
Oregon Judicial Department structure. Once the database was selected and
developed, initial pilot sites in the Marion, Malheur, and Clackamas counties were
selected to beta test the system. Using the feedback provided by these courts initial
modifications were made to the system before being distributed as a test version to 11
courts in August 2002. Using survey feedback results, a list of priorities was created
and a consultant was commissioned to carry out recommendations identified in the
survey results and conduct site visits with court staff from the Office of the State Court
Administrator (OSCA). The final version was released in December 2002.
In March 2005, The Court Programs & Services Division (CPSD) of the OJD
received a Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (Grant #02-644) to enhance the ODCMS
to make it more applicable and workable for juvenile and family drug courts. Beginning
August 2005, CPSD began distributing the database to Oregon's treatment courts. The
new version, the Oregon Treatment Court Management System, has been renamed to
be more inclusive of all Oregon treatment courts.
* Source: Oregon Judicial Department.
40
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
Exhibit D
Page A,~_ of 4 P
r.
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix H
FY 2006-2007 Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant
Program
BUDGET WORKSHEET FORMAT
PERSONNEL SALARIES
List each position by title, percentage of time devoted to the program
or FTE, annual salary/hourly rate, fringe benefits, and payroll taxes.
CONTRACTUAL/CONSULTANT SERVICES
Provide a brief description of the services to be provided and the
hourly/daily rate and estimated time on program. Consultant fees in
excess of $450/day must receive prior approval.
RENT AND UTILITIES
Itemize by type (rent, telephone, pager, janitorial services) and
monthly rate.
SUPPLIES
Generally, supplies are items that have a useful life less than one
year. List supplies by type, quantity, and unit cost.
TRAVELITRAINING/ CONFERENCES
Itemize travel expenses such as conference registration fees, meals
(or per diem), lodging, airfare, mileage, tolls, commercial
transportation, and parking fees. Make sure travel expenses are
documented in sufficient detail (dates/times/receipts/brief description
of the purpose of the trip and for how many people). Be sure to
obtain prior approval for out-of-state travel.
EQUIPMENT
Generally, equipment is tangible personal property costing over
$5,000 and having a useful life of more than one year. Specify type,
quantity, and unit cost.
ADMINISTRATION
Administrative costs may not exceed ten percent of the total grant
and will be approved on a case-by-case basis. Itemize costs such
as accounting, payroll, etc.
EVALUATION
Itemize expenses related to the development and implementation of
evaluation data collection and analysis
OTHER EXPENSES
Itemize expenses that do not readily fit into any of the other budget
categories (such as direct client services)
TOTAL EXPENSES
• Itemize all other sources and amounts of funding.
Grant Other
Request Funding* Total
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
41
Exhibit
Page of -J(
p
State of Oregon FY 2006-2008 Competitive Grant Programs Request for Proposals
Appendix I
FY 2006-2007 Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
DRUG COURT PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The following performance measures were approved by the Chief Justice
Advisory Committee on Treatment Courts on November 17, 2005.
Objective: Reduce Crime
Measure: Recidivism
Percentage of program graduates charged with a felony or
misdemeanor within 12 months of graduation
Objective: Sobriety / Reduce Dependency
Measure: Clean Alcohol and Drug Tests
Percentage of all drug or alcohol tests that are clean; computed per
90-day program participation interval; Percentage change across
intervals
Objective: Drug-free parents
Measure: Graduation rate for parents
Percentage of participants with parent/guardian relationship who
graduate
Objective: Accountability
Measure: Graduation Rate
Percentage of entrants who achieve graduate status
Objective: Accountability
Measure: Retention Rate
Percentage of entrants who stay in the program 90 days, 180 days,
etc.
Objective: Accountability
Measure: Court attendance compliance
Percentage of court dates met
Objective: Accountability
Measure: AOD attendance compliance
Percentage of treatment dates met
Drug Court Implementation and Enhancement Grant Program
Criminal Justice Commission
42
Exhibit D
Page 4Cp of 4(-
1~v,TESL'
04
2~ Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
❑ 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MEETING AGENDA
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
3:30 P.M., MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2006
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building, Second Floor
1300 NW Wall St.., Bend
1. Call to Order & Introductions
2. Approval of Minutes of January 9, 2006 Meeting
3. Discussion of February 13 Department of Corrections Presentation regarding
Treatment and Sentencing Options - Mike Dugan (10 minutes)
4. Presentation of "Darkness 2 Light", the Tri-County Child Sexual Abuse
Prevention Program - Bob Smit (30 minutes)
5. Discussion of Byrne Methamphetamine Reduction Grant Program - Mike
Dugan
6. Update regarding Family Drug Court Proposal
7. Discussion of Sheriff's Levy, Proposed Jail Expansion and Programming Needs
- Scott Johnson, Les Stiles
8. Update regarding Dedicated Courthouse Parking for Law Enforcement
Personnel - Ernie Mazorol, Andy Jordan
9. Other Business and Items for the Next Meeting (March 6)
Exhibit 15
Page / of /