Macomb County, Michigan

Transcription

1 Macomb County, Michigan 1 Jail Needs Analysis and Feasibility Study VRJS in association with David Bennett Consulting 18 February 2015

2 ! There is no relationship between crime rates and incarceration rates! Build it and they will come

3 Managing the Factors! Court case processing efficiency! System policies and principles! Pre-Trial Services! Continuum of alternatives from booking to re-entry! An Evidence-based system with effective interventions

4 4 Presentation Agenda Introductions Project Understanding Presentation Agenda Project Approach & Methodology Key Issues / Questions Answered Why VRJS? Q & A

5 5 Project Team Jim Robertson David Bennett Donna Lattin

6 6 Jim Robertson Introductions 42 Years of Experience Montgomery and Prince George s County National Institute of Corrections Consulting Services since 1991 Primarily County Government Five Michigan Counties

7 7 David Bennett Introductions 37-years of experience developing plans for counties Worked in 40-states with several hundred counties Extensive Michigan experience

8 8 Project Understanding Prior Projects/Activities 2003 Needs Assessment and Population Projections 2005 Study Current Plante Moran Study March 10 th Wakely Associates Presentation Comprehensive Approach Factors Are Complex Goal of One Empty Bed

9 9 Project Approach Facilitation Consensus Building Defining Expectations Communication

10 10 VRJS Project Manager Jim Robertson Introductions

11 11 Facility Development Process Nine Phases Project Recognition Needs Assessment Go/No Go Decision Program Development Project Definition Go/No Go Decision Design Bidding Go/No Go Decision Construction Occupancy Post Occupancy

12 12 Project Methodology Kick-off Meeting Analyze Existing Information Data Analysis Jail Snapshot & Case Processing System Components Examination Alternatives Jail Forecast Symposium

13 13 Project Methodology Functional Program & Costs Functional & Space Requirements Project Cost Analysis Consensus Building Findings and Recommendations

14 14 Project Deliverables Draft Interim Reports Population Management Plan Functional Requirements Space Requirements Cost Estimates Implementation Strategies Final Report

15

16

17 Overhaul the System Newt Gingrich! State spends $2B a year; 20% of general fund! Longer prison terms than US average! Not making community safer; high recidivism! Right on Crime Texas, Georgia, Ohio, & South Dakota! Swift and certain consequences Detroit Free Press 15 NOV 2014

18 Council for State Governments Findings! Supervision not linked to risk! Wide variation in sentencing outcomes! Wide variation in revocation rates! Wide variation in straddle category! No decline in probation recidivism Council for State Governments 2013 Study

19 Michigan findings (cont.)! Too high use of custody for technical violators! No mandate that high-risk probationers also receive community supervision! Long sentences! Excessive dollars spent on corrections Council for State Governments 2013 Study

20 Good Assessments System Reform! Reduce system costs! Improve outcomes! Prioritize resources! Inform decision-making! Tailor sentences & conditions! Offender management

21 Assessment! Develop the process! Individualized plan! Capacity planning! Continuum of programs! Specialized population

22 Assessment (cont.)! Evidence-based programs! Policy review! Staff training! Outcome tracking! Step-down options

23 Jail Assessment Center! Pre-Trial assessment & placement! Assess inmates eligibility for Community Corrections Center placement! Re-assess probation violators! Behavior based inmate management

24 Pre-Trial Services! Validated risk-assessment! Evidence-based practices! Continuum of supervision! Intake for criminal justice system

25 Early Case Resolution! Use case processing data as a catalyst to re-examine current practices! Embrace systemwide the concept of Same Justice Sooner through changes in court processing

26 Crime / Violence Reduc1on (Proven Programs) 30 50% Reduction Cognitive Programs Ceasefire Boston Re-entry 20 30% Reduction Drug Court (for high-risk) Mental Health Court Multi-Systemic Family Treatment 10 20% Reduction NO REDUCTION Supervision & Treatment Substance Abuse Treatment Drug Court Incarceration alone Average Recidivism Reduction ~ 10% Increase Rate of Offending Scared Straight Boot Camp Intensive Supervision (no services) Juvenile Detention (all but High Violent) 26

27 Benefit to Cost: Return on the Dollar* Cognitive-behavior treatment $35.70 Employment training $35.13 Work Release $9.97 Mental Health Court $4.95 Drug Court $2.87 Intensive Supervision only (no treatment) + $0.14 Domestic Violence treatment + $2.91 *(Aos, Steve, et al., (2011) Return on Investment: Evidence-based Options to Improve Statewide Outcomes, (Document No ) Olympia: Washington State Institute of Public Policy)

28 Qualitative Review:! The Research! How to get best bang out of Drug Court?! What is optimal length of Jail sanction?! How to reduce violence?! What constitutes meaningful probation supervision?! Does domestic violence treatment work?! What is the best way to respond to technical violations?

29 Consider New Ideas & Models:! Community Corrections Center Concept Behavior based stepdown from Jail to community

30 Why a Community Corrections Center?! Provides a lower cost alternative to jail! Holds offenders accountable! Prepares inmates to return to the community! Allows inmates to find/maintain employment! Helps offenders addressing underlying risk factors! Offers a positive path to change

31 Clientele! Sentenced Inmates! Diversion Clients! Sanctioned Probationers! Short-term Stabilization! Prison Re-Entry Washington County, OR

32 Residential Treatment! Alcohol & Drug in and out-patient treatment! 12-Step programs! Cognitive programs! Anger management! Employment services! Computer literacy! Parenting! Medication management Washington County, OR

33 Success Rate! Overall 85 percent successfully complete the program! Unsuccessful:! 11 percent rules violations! 3 percent walk away/escape! 1 percent new crime! Treatment dorm success rate is 74 percent Washington County, OR

34 Consider New Ideas & Models:! Ceasefire! Concentrate on high risk! Communicate consequences! Chance to change! Connect & monitor

35 THE VALUE OF TARGETING RISK Change in Recidivism Rate Residential Program + 5% Res. + Cognitive + 1% Res. + Cog. + Higher Risk Offender - 8% Res. + Cog. + HR + Intensity - 14% Res. + Cog. + HR + Int. + Duration - 18% (Lowenkamp, 2006)

36 Jail Capacity Forecasts n n n n n Admissions Rate Average Length of Stay County Population Peaking Factor Classification Factor

37 Jail Capacity Planning (A Systems Approach) Jail Snapshot Case Processing Analysis System Assessment Risk Study Capacity Forecast Capacity Scenarios System Master Plan

38 The Symposium! Full-day program to review the findings, forecasts, and recommendations! County, criminal justice and other officials

39 Why Our Team? 39 A Criminal Justice Planning Team with an Open Mind Majority of Work is Local Criminal Justice Projects National Expertise / Local Understanding 80+ Years of Combined Experience We are Adaptable Committed to a User Oriented Process Experience with the Public Process We Enjoy Our Work

40 Questions 40 And Answers