Redesigning the Front End of the System Options for Analysis, Goal-Setting, and Change August 23, 2013.

Redesigning the Front End of the System

Options for Analysis, Goal-Setting, and ChangeAugust 23, 2013

Pretrial Stage of Criminal Case

NIC Evidence Based Decision Making

Arrest Decisions

Pretrial Release/

Supervision Decisions

Diversion Decisions

Local Institutional

Release Decisions

Local Institutional Intervention

Decisions

Sentencing Decisions

Community Intervention

Decisions

Violation Response Decisions

Discharge from Criminal

Justice System

Decision

Charging Decisions

Plea Decisions

Transition from Jail to the Community

The Urban Institute

National Institute of Corrections

Importance of Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils

•Informal poll of judges, coordinators, attorneys▫Themes

Easier to facilitate change Easier to work with each other outside of

meetings Diminishes barriers Facilitates openness and goodwill More planned use of resources Necessary to receive grants (State and

Federal) Focus on research

2001-2013 CJMC Recommendations

• Expand electronic monitoring for pre-trial and sentence (2001)• Implement Drug Treatment Court (2002)• Closing the work release facility (2005)• Implement an OWI (intoxicated drivers) Treatment Court (2006)• Systems assessment – The Carey Group (2007)• Gender-specific programming (2008)• Incorporate mental health screenings and increase mental

health services in the jail (2008)• Participate in the Transition from Jail to Community Initiative

(2009)• Town Hall Meeting (2011)• Cognitive-behavioral groups in jail and community (2011)• Heroin Summit (2013)

Pretrial “Assessment”

•Proxy (citations)•Risk Assessment for Failure to Appear,

Rearrest Pretrial•Short forms for mental health, substance

abuse referral for assessments•Diversion assessment•Problem solving court criteria•Etc.

Goals of Pretrial Assessment

•Maximize release pending trial

•Public Safety – no new arrests pending trial▫Integrity of Judicial Process – victim,

witness intimidation

•Appearance – make all court appearances

Why Complete a Proxy at arrest?

• ID low risk early• Save resources• Protect community• Inform other decision

makers• Triage the need for a full

COMPAS

What makes a low risk offender

• Self-correcting• Does harm• Interrupts pro-social

activities• Wastes $$

MediumTo High

Use of the Hawaiian Proxy at the Decision to Arrest

1. Current Age

2. Age of First Arrest

3. Number of Prior

Arrests

Use of the PROXY/COMPAS

PRE CHARGING DIVERSION

Ordinance Misdemeanor Felony0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 119 126

13

65 67

6

Offense Level Breakdown

20122013

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

21 2125

2224

19

66

18 1822

2523

21

33

38

30

25

Diversion Summary

2012 2013Totals2012: 2582013: 138 (YTD)

Offenses• Retail Theft• Possession of THC

paraphernalia• Disorderly Conduct• Other

Totals referred from 2012 to July 2013Number referred: 396Number not completed due to no show or new charge : 25Number Completed: 371

Offender re-arrest information 12 months out from 2012 participants: January – May 201224 subjects• One felony/misdemeanor• One misdemeanor• Four forfeitures

Milwaukee County Pretrial Risk Assessment & Screening Tools

• MCPRAI-R▫ Validated, 6-factor pretrial risk assessment instrument ▫ Measure risk for pretrial failure (NCA/FTA)

• LSI-R:SV ▫ Validated, 8-item risk assessment instrument ▫ Long term risk for recidivism ▫ Taken from LSI-R

• UNCOPE▫ 6 question screener ▫ ID risk for abuse/dependence for alcohol and other drugs

Milwaukee County Pretrial Risk Assessment & Screening Tools

• INTAKE INTERVIEW ▫Demographics, info needed to supervise defendant,

risk instrument factors, ID needs

• PRAXIS▫Tool designed to guide bail and release condition

decisions

• RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT▫Provides all relevant risk assessment information

via web-enabled access for all parties

Milwaukee County Purpose of Screening

•Provide stakeholders with objective information regarding a defendant’s risk for pretrial misconduct (FTA/NCA) and recommend pretrial conditions that will mitigate that risk.

•Identify potential candidates for available Early Intervention strategies such as TAD.

Milwaukee County Pretrial & EI Risk Assessment Process

Jail Bookin

g

Universal/EI Screening(MCPRAI-R,

UNCOPE, LSI-R: SV, Praxis)

LSI-R:SV Score = Low Risk (0-2)

LSI-R:SV Score = Moderate Risk (3-5)

Conduct LSI-R

Eligibility Screening

For EI (DIV/DPA)

Not Eligible for EI

Eligible

LSI-R:SV Score =

Low (0-2)

Diversion

LSI-R Score =

Moderate (14-33)

DPA

Diversion/Problem Solving Courts

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

18 1626

34

58

85

198 235225

237

245234

220

272

252 259

297

267 266252

243

196

183

187 181172 172

192

JSP - Bed Days Saved Compared to the Jail Population

Justice Sanctions Jail

Estimated:$22.50/day for community programs$100/day for jail

La Crosse County

La Crosse Treatment Courts• Drug Treatment Court

▫ 2005 Process evaluationCost/Benefit of

3.6/1▫ 2012 Outcome evaluation

indicated a 10-year recidivism rate of 20%

▫ 2012 ADP of 23 5 successful 4 unsuccessful

• OWI Treatment Court▫ Current undergoing a

process and outcome evaluation (funding through OJA)

▫ 2012 ADP of 135 17,075 bed days saved

(47 beds/day) 55 successful 35 unsuccessful

Self-Assessment

• Compare with ABA Standards

Questions to Ask System Stakeholders

Performance Measures• Numerators and

Denominators

• # of arrestees cited/# arrestees eligible for citation

• # of custodial arrests screened/# custodial arrests

• % low, medium, high risk • Concurrence Rates• How they got out, by type

of release and risk• How they perform, by type

of release and risk• Etc…

Wood County Drug Court Outcomes

•Collecting data since receiving the TAD grant in 2007

•Used to inform, improve and measure performance

•Since 2007▫56% completion rate ▫113 total participants▫Total incarceration days averted 10,697

Milwaukee County Pretrial Outcomes

•89% of eligible defendants screened•75% pretrial release rate•Felony appearance rate = 85%•Felony no new criminal activity rate =

87%•Misdemeanor appearance rate = 67%•Misdemeanor no new criminal activity

rate = 83%

Milwaukee TAD Outcomes

•Since 2007▫15,000 TAD Screenings▫1,519 admissions 1,418 discharged▫65% successful completion rate▫99,421 incarceration days averted

*72,147 local jail bed days *27,795 prison bed days

Getting Started• Compare yourself against

the standards of practice• Collect and analyze data

▫ Ask for help• Get creative

Help!

•Bureau of Justice Assistance, National Training and Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC)

•National Institute of Corrections •National Association of Pretrial Services

Agencies•Pretrial Justice Institute•Crime and Justice Institute•Etc.

For Follow Up

•Tiana Glenna, Community Justice Council Coordinator, Eau Claire County

•Jane Klekamp, Justice Support Services Program Manager, La Crosse County

•Holly Szablewski, Judicial Review Coordinator, Milwaukee County

•Ryan McMillen, Adult Drug Court Coordinator/Case Manager, Wood County