CAPCOG Regional Strategic Criminal Justice Plan

Transcription

1 CAPCOG Regional Strategic Criminal Justice Plan Plan Year 2018 Prepared by the Capital Area Council of Governments for the Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division December, 2016

2 Table of Contents Section 1: Executive Summary... 5 Section 2: An Overview of Crime in the CAPCOG Region Uniform Crime Statistics County by County Analysis Detailed Adult and Juvenile Arrest Data Section 3: An Overview of the CAPCOG Region Regional Profile Population and Growth of the CAPCOG Region Migration In and Out of the Region Economic Information Section 4: Past Grant Funding to the Region Available Data Section 5: Regional Criminal Justice Planning Process and Priorities Planning Process Regional Planning Stakeholder Meeting Participants Regional Priorities Appendix A: NAICS Establishment and Employment Data Appendix B: Survey Results Respondents Background Information Juvenile Justice and School Based Prevention Systems Mental Health/ Substance Abuse Treatment Victims of Crime Criminal Justice System

3 Table of Tables and Figures Table 2.1: CAPCOG Region Crime Statistics, 2005 and Table 2.2: Change in Uniform Crime Rates per 100,000 people in CAPCOG Area, Table 2.3: State and Regional Crime Rate per 100,000 People Comparisons... 9 Figure 2.1: CAPCOG Total Crime Rates per 100,000 People, Figure 2.2: Map of Changes in Total Crime Rates per 100,000 Residents, , by CAPCOG County Figure 2.3: Percent Changes in Total Crime Rate, , by CAPCOG County Figure 2.4: CAPCOG County Violent Crime Rates per 100,000 People, Figure 2.6: CAPCOG County Property Crime Rates per 100,000 People, Figure 2.7: Percent Changes in Property Crime Rates, , by CAPCOG County Figure 2.9: Year Over Year Crime Rate per 100,000 People, , 5 least populated counties Table 2.4: Regional Arrest Information by Category for Offenders Age 18 and Above, Table 2.5: Regional Arrest Information by Category for Offenders Less Than 18 Years Old, Table 3.1: Demographic Information Table 3.2: Educational Attainment of People Age Table 3.3: Social Demographics Figure 3.1: Percentage of Disconnected Youth in CAPCOG by County Figure 3.2: Total Regional Population, Table 3.4: Population per County, Figure 3.3: Growth Rate Across CAPCOG Counties, (5 Least Populated Counties) Figure 3.4: Growth Rate Across CAPCOG Counties, (5 Most Populated Counties) Table 3.5: Migration in CAPCOG, Figure 3.5: Migration for Bastrop County, Figure 3.6: Migration for Blanco County, Figure 3.7: Migration for Burnet County, Figure 3.8: Migration for Caldwell County, Figure 3.9: Migration for Fayette County, Figure 3.10: Migration for Hays County, Figure 3.11: Migration for Lee County, Figure 3.12: Migration for Llano County, Figure 3.13: Migration for Travis County, Figure 3.14: Migration for Williamson County, Figure 3.15: Travis County Net Migration Flows Zoomed into CAPCOG Region, Table 3.6: CAPCOG Income Figure 3.16: County by County Median Income Map Figure 3.17: County by County Income Extremes Maps Table 3.7: Unemployment in CAPCOG Table 3.8: Unemployment by County in CAPCOG, August Figure 3.18: CAPCOG County Unemployment Map for year olds

4 Table 3.9: Economic Demographics Figure 4.1: General Victims Assistance Grants CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, Figure 4.2: General Victims Assistance Grants, Funding by Victim Served < $100,000, Figure 4.3: General Victims Assistance Grants, Funding by Victim Served > $100,000, Figure 4.4: Violent Crimes Against Women Grant in the CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, Figure 4.5: Violent Crimes Against Women Grants CAPCOG Region, Funding by Victim Served, Figure 4.6: Justice Assistance Grant in the CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, Figure 4.7: Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Grant in the CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, Table A.1: Places of Employment in CAPCOG Region by NAICS category, Table A.2: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services NAICS 4-digit sub-categories Table A.3: Number of Employees by NAICS category in CAPCOG Region,

5 Section 1: Executive Summary The Regional Strategic Plan encompasses the ten counties (Bastrop, Blanco, Burnet, Caldwell, Fayette, Hays, Lee, Llano, Travis, and Williamson counties) in the Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) service area. The purpose of the Strategic Plan is to identify gaps in direct victim assistance, juvenile justice, mental health, and criminal justice issues so that services, existing programs, new initiatives, and funding opportunities may be reviewed and resources targeted accordingly. Planning Process Planning for funding in FY 2018 began with the creation and distribution of the Criminal Justice Regional Needs Survey in September In early October 2016 two regional stakeholder outreach meetings were conducted. Participants were asked to identify needs within their area of expertise related to: Training; Direct Services; Education & Outreach; Investigation and/or Prosecution; Support Technology and Equipment; and Staffing and Personnel Support (direct or contractual). These needs identified by the stakeholders and the survey results were reviewed by the CAPCOG Criminal Justice Advisory Committee (CJAC) and recommended to the CAPCOG Executive Committee for adoption as regional priorities. Data sources were identified to best drive analysis of regional needs with consideration to resource gaps, trends in types of problems, and priorities of relevant funding sources. Pertinent data was collected and presented to the stakeholders and CJAC to aid in the discussion and development of priorities. This data is also included in the Strategic Plan to aid applicants in applying for criminal justice funding from the Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division. This Executive Summary lists the regional priorities in each of the following areas: Criminal Justice System Improvements; Juvenile Justice System Improvements; Direct Victim Services, and Mental Health/Substance Abuse Treatment identified in the regional planning process and approved by the CJAC. Criminal Justice System Improvements Regional Priorities Training Technological Improvements Mental Health Services Outreach/ Education Programmatic Personnel Specialty Services Regional Law Enforcement and Prosecutorial Strategies Juvenile Justice System Improvements Regional Priorities Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking (DMST) Mental Health 5

6 Programmatic Personnel Re-entry / Aftercare Community Supports Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender/ Diversity Services School Based Direct Victim Services Regional Priorities Programmatic Personnel Multicultural/Multilingual Support Services Training Public Education and Awareness Basic Victim Services Technological Improvements Mental Health/ Substance Treatment Regional Priorities Supportive Recovery Services Housing Training Indigent Defense Programmatic Personnel Crisis Respite Centers Specific programs and services for each priority listed above can be found in Section 5.3 of this plan. These specifics provide more detail of the types of projects that are seen as important to improving the regions overall ability to deal with criminal justice issues. Examples of these specifics for each category include: Criminal Justice System Improvements: increased bandwidth; mental health first aid training; active shooter training; flyers and PSAs targeting crime; crisis intervention teams; veterans services; violent offense investigations Juvenile Justice System Improvements: peer/ survivor mentor programs; employment supports and education; in-patient mental health facilities; parent education trainers; prosocial recreational and leisure activities; LGBT specialized services; healthy relationship education Direct Victim Services: forensic interviewers; interpreters; emergency and long term shelters; prosecution and staff training; violence prevention education is schools and with youth; safety alert devices Mental Health/ Substance Treatment: diversion programs; transitional housing; life skills training; psychiatric services; case management; inter-agency collaboration It is anticipated that this Strategic Plan will be reviewed and updated annually and that it will serve as a guide for continued improvement of Criminal Justice programs and services across the CAPCOG region. 6

7 Section 2: An Overview of Crime in the CAPCOG Region 2.1 Uniform Crime Statistics All crime statistics in this section of the strategic plan were taken from the Texas Department of Public Safety Uniform Crime Reporting program, referencing the Federal Bureau of Investigation s (FBI) Uniform Crime Statistics. Table 2.1 presents the number of cases for the seven different index crimes that comprise two broader categories: violent crimes and property crimes. The table presents changes for a ten year period from 2005 to 2015, the most current available reporting period. Over this decade violent crime went up by about 16%, while property crime went down by 10%, but note that the region added over half a million people, a 38% population increase. Given the population change the rate of crime is a better indication of criminal activity levels and is discussed later in this section. Table 2.1: CAPCOG Region Crime Statistics, 2005 and 2015 CAPCOG REGION Change Population 1,542,162 2,122, ,418 Total Violent Crime 5,158 5, Murder Rape * Robbery 1,398 1, Assault 3,181 3, Total Property Crime 61,164 55,070-6,094 Burglary 11,722 8,729-2,993 Larceny 45,883 43,059-2,824 Auto Theft 3,559 3, Total Crime 66,322 61,039-5,283 Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Table 2.2: Change in Uniform Crime Rates per 100,000 people in CAPCOG Area, CAPCOG REGION Change Total Violent Crime Murder Rape * Robbery Assault Total Property Crime 3, , ,371.6 Burglary Larceny 2, , Auto Theft Total Crime 4, , ,424.9 Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas * Rape was redefined by the FBI in 2014, which led to more crimes that are sexual in nature being indexed as rape 7

8 Table 2.2 above details the rate of crime per 100,000 residents and the change in rates over the last 10 years for each crime sub-category. As the data shows, there is a clear pattern of a drop in crime rates over all categories, except for rape. The reason for the increase in rapes is the transition to the FBI s new definition of rape in There was an over 50% increase in the number of rapes per 100,000 people that occurred from 2013 to 2014 in the State. The new definition of rape is the overwhelming reason for the increase in this category. Before it was redefined the definition was rather vague and pertained only to women, this led to many crimes that were sexual in nature being indexed in other crime categories. Year-to-year data exhibits the same trend, but some inconsistencies were noted. For example, the murder/manslaughter rate in 2010 saw the single highest increase across any one year period and for any sub-category, driven almost entirely by incidents reported by the Austin Police Department, where the number of these cases increased from 22 incidents in 2009 to 38 in This represented a 72% increase in incidents between years, where the overall population of the city saw only a 2.7% increase. While a definitive explanation for this increase is not available, officials of the Austin Police Department have previously attributed this increase to the economic downturn that faced the city starting in 2009 and moving forward into Table 2.3 below provides further context for the reduced crime rates. The table compares the same regional crime rate data with the State numbers. The middle, darker-blue column subtracts column 2 (2015 State rates) from column 1 (2015 regional rates) to show that most crimes, with the exception of larceny, occur less-often in the CAPCOG region than they do in the State as a whole. This was also the case in 2005, as one can see in the pink columns in table 2.3 As detailed in the previous table, the regional rates have all dropped significantly. Note that the State change is even more dramatic. Although crime continues to decrease in the region and the rate of crime is lower than the State, crime dropped at a much faster pace across the State than in the region between the 2005 and 2015 reporting periods. For example, the region s reduction in violent crime was 45% of the State drop. In other words, the region s drop was less than half of the State reduction (53 fewer violent crimes per year out of 100,000 people in the region) versus (119 fewer violent crimes per year out of 100,000 people in the State). Multiple variables contribute to crime rates, and this report did not attempt to control for these various factors. The trends suggest that there is a baseline level of crime across the region and the State that creates a curve in the data towards the baseline. Note that several criminal categories, such as white collar crimes, drug crimes, and DWI are not included in the data. A more detailed description of all crimes is included in section 2.3. When looking at the drop in crime rates as a percentage of current crime rates, it shows the difference in the change for CAPCOG vs. the State to be less drastic than when just comparing the change in rates. Comparing the percentage change also provides a better context for impact the region is having on crime compared to the State, since crime rates in the State have consistently been higher than the crime rates in the region. These percentages show that the State is definitely doing better at reducing violent crime with a 29% reduction compared to only a 19% reduction for the CAPCOG region. When comparing the percentage reduction of property crime CAPCOG and Texas both saw a 53% reduction. Since there is 8

9 a great deal more property crime than violent crime, the percentage reduction in total crime rounds to 50% for both CAPCOG and Texas. So, while just looking at table 2.3 may give one the impression that CAPCOG is not keeping up with the State in reducing crime, a closer look shows that CAPCOG is keeping up with the State in terms of the percentage it is reducing total crime and property crime. While the region is not keeping up with the State in reducing violent crime it is not doing as bad as it looks when comparing just the reduction in violent crime rates. Table 2.3: State and Regional Crime Rate per 100,000 People Comparisons 2015 Regional Rates 2015 Texas Statewide Rates 2015 Regional vs. State 2005 Regional Rates 2005 Texas Statewide Rates 2005 Region vs. State Total Violent Crime Murder Rape * Robbery Assault Total Property Crime 2, , , , Burglary Larceny 2, , , Auto Theft Total Crime 2, , , , Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas 2.2 County by County Analysis County level crime statistics are reported in this section to give a better view of how criminal activity has occurred and trends have developed across the region in the last 5 years. It should be noted that the scope of the majority of this section did not include crime data for the years between 2010 and The rates of change are comparisons of two time periods and are not compounded rates. For county level analysis, especially smaller counties, statistical anomalies may skew the perceived trends. At the end of this section a table is included with total crime and crime rates per 100,000 residents for 2011 to Figure 2.1 is a graph of the total crime rate per 100,000 people in 2015 for the State, each of the 10 counties in the CAPCOG region, and the region as a whole. The total crime rate is generally lower in the rural counties, although Williamson County has one of the lowest crime rates in the region with the second highest population. The crime rate for Travis County is slightly higher than the State s crime rate and is the only CAPCOG County with a crime rate that is higher than the State. Burnet, Fayette, Llano, * Rape was redefined by the FBI in 2014, which led to more crimes that are sexual in nature being indexed as rape 9

10 Crimes per 100,000 people and Lee all have very similar rates to Williamson County. While, Blanco County has the lowest crime rate in the region. Figure 2.1: CAPCOG Total Crime Rates per 100,000 People, ,000 3, ,500 3, ,000 2, ,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 1, , , , , , , , , Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Figure 2.2: Map of Changes in Total Crime Rates per 100,000 Residents, , by CAPCOG County 10

11 Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas A map of the change in crime rate by county is included as Figure 2.2. While, Crime has gone down in all counties in the region, crime rates seem to be going down slower in the counties that surround Travis County. A growing concern among planners is the suburbanization of poverty rising housing costs in the urban core has driven people farther from where government and social services have traditionally located. Transportation and energy costs are also typically higher for these families. Poverty rates have increased in these areas, and criminal justice planners noted that this has corresponded to increased crime. Outlying communities are often not equipped to deal with rising crime rates, and as federal funding for crime prevention and law enforcement follow national trends of overall crime reduction, it becomes harder to find resources to handle crime in rural areas. Figure 2.3 describes the change in rates of total crime in the last 5 years by county. All but 3 CAPCOG counties decrease in total crime rate exceeded the State decrease. All counties in the region saw a decrease in total crime rate. Comparing Figure 2.3 and 2.5, Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Lee, and Travis saw an increase in violent crimes, but a decrease in total crime. While all counties in the region saw a reduction in total crime, half of the CAPCOG counties experienced a rise in violent crime rates. Figure 2.3: Percent Changes in Total Crime Rate, , by CAPCOG County 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% -15.0% -12.1% -20.0% -18.5% -18.1% -25.0% -30.0% -35.0% -31.4% -28.6% -28.1% -26.1% -25.6% -25.1% -24.2% -40.0% -45.0% -41.3% -40.1% Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Figure 2.4 presents the rate of violent crime by county for 2010 to Travis County has the highest violent crime rate in the region, just like with the total crime rate, but unlike with total crime rates, all 10 CAPCOG counties has a lower crime rate than the State. Blanco County has the lowest violent crime rate 11

12 Crimes per 100,000 people in the region with Llano County close behind having the second lowest rate. Burnet, Caldwell, Fayette, Hays, Lee and Llano are all similar in terms of violent crime rates with all 6 counties falling in a range of 18 violent crimes per 100,000 people. Figure 2.4: CAPCOG County Violent Crime Rates per 100,000 People, Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Figure 2.5 describes the change in violent crime rates in the last 5 years by county. Violent crime rates in CAPCOG have decreased by a greater percentage than the rate of Texas as a whole. Half (Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays, Lee, and Travis) of CAPCOG s counties experienced violent crime rates that grew from 2010 to The other half (Blanco, Burnet, Fayette, Llano, and Williamson) of CAPCOG s 10 counties had violent crime rates that decreased faster than the State during this time frame. Comparing property crime rates for counties in the CAPCOG region we see many similarities to the comparison of total crime rates in the region. The reason for these similarities is the much greater rate of property crime to violent crime, which causes it to dominate the comparison of total crime rates. In comparing Figure 2.1, total crime rates, and Figure 2.6, property crime rates, Burnet County falls below Williamson, and Llano Counties when ranking the counties based on property crime rates, while being above these counties when comparing total crime rates. 12

13 Crimes per 100,000 people Figure 2.5: Percent Changes in Violent Crime Rates, , by CAPCOG County 250.0% 200.0% 179.2% 213.0% 150.0% 100.0% 82.8% 50.0% 0.0% 8.9% 12.8% -50.0% % -83.6% -63.5% -42.0% -37.5% -32.6% -13.1% -8.9% Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Figure 2.6: CAPCOG County Property Crime Rates per 100,000 People, , , , , , , , , , , , Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas 13

14 Figure 2.7: Percent Changes in Property Crime Rates, , by CAPCOG County 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% -15.0% -20.0% -14.9% -25.0% -30.0% -35.0% -32.5% -30.4% -29.4% -25.7% -25.4% -25.3% -24.9% -23.8% -21.2% -40.0% -45.0% -41.4% -37.9% Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Just like with the change in violent crime rates, half (Blanco, Burnet, Fayette, Llano, and Travis) of CAPCOG counties have property crime rates decreasing faster than the States property crime rate from 2010 to But unlike with violent crime rates all 10 CAPCOG counties saw property crime decrease over this time frame. Hays County saw the smallest decrease with close to a 15% reduction in property crime during this time. Llano County with over a 40% decrease in property crime rate saw the largest decrease in the region. When comparing crime rates for a 10 year period, Fayette County experienced a drastic increase in all crime rates. To better understand the increase we looked at year over year data for Fayette County for this 10 year period. In looking at the year over year data we notice that only 3 agencies within Fayette County were participating in Uniform Crime Reporting from 2005 to Starting in 2009 the Schulenburg Police Department begins to report, and the crime rates for Fayette County increase significantly, with the percentage of violent crimes going up more dramatically than property crime. When looking at the yearly crime data for Schulenburg the number and rate of aggravated assaults really stands out, with this small city having more than half of the counties aggravated assaults. These assaults seem to be the major contributor to the increased rate of violent crime in Fayette County. One reason may be that Schulenburg is located on I-10 which is the main corridor for traffic between San Antonio and Houston, meaning that there are a large number of people from outside Fayette County who travel through Schulenburg. So, while it only makes up roughly 1/8 th of the County s population many more people are spending time in the City every day. 14

15 15

16 Crimes per 100,000 people Crimes per 100,000 people Figure 2.8: Year Over Year County Crime Rate per 100,000 People , 5 most populated counties 5, , , , , ,000.0 Hays Bastrop Burnet Travis Williamson 2, , , Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas Figure 2.9: Year Over Year Crime Rate per 100,000 People, , 5 least populated counties 2, , , , , , ,400.0 Lee Llano Blanco Caldwell Fayette 1, , Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Crime In Texas 16

17 Figures 2.8 and 2.9 shows the total crime and crime rate per 100,000 people for the most recent 5 years for each county in the CAPCOG region. In general we see an incremental reduction in crime as time passes which has been the direction that crime and crime rates have been going recently. There are some instances where crime rates go up, but in almost all cases they recede back to, or below the rate that was seen before the increase. An example of this is in Lee County where in 2011 there was a crime rate of 1,776 crimes per 100,000 people, this rate spiked to 2,258.2 the next year, and while it took a few years, by 2015 the crime rate in Lee County was 1,570.1 per 100,000 people, a decrease from the rate in Detailed Adult and Juvenile Arrest Data Tables 2.4 and 2.5 provide further detail for specific categories of arrest for all arrests made in the CAPCOG region for adult and juvenile offenders, respectively, in the year This year represents the most recent complete set of data collected via the Uniform Crime Statistics. Note that while these specific data are housed through Uniform Crime Statistics, they had to be accessed via the Texas Department of Public Safety Uniform Crime Statistics Office at the State level due to their specificity. The arrest data provides information on arrests in 19 more categories than the 7 index crimes for which incidents of crime are reported, and 10 subcategories for drug arrests, and 3 subcategories for gambling arrests. While the arrest data does not provide information on the number incidents for each of these crime categories, it is nice to have this more detailed information on arrests in the region, since arrests for the 7 index crimes makes up only 13% of total arrests in the region. Table 2.4: Regional Arrest Information by Category for Offenders Age 18 and Above, 2015 Crime # of Arrests Murder/Nonnegligent Manslaughter 37 Manslaughter by Negligence 3 Rape 52 Robbery 280 Aggravated Assault 1374 Burglary-Breaking or Entering 594 Larceny-Theft(Except Motor Vehicle) 5703 Motor Vehicle Theft 127 Other Assaults 6319 Arson 34 Forgery/Counterfeiting 309 Fraud 675 Embezzlement 17 Stolen Property(Buy,Receive,Possess) 46 Vandalism 505 Weapons(Carry/Possess,etc) 683 Prostitution and Commercial Vice 151 Prostitution 147 Assisting or Promoting Protitution 3 17

18 Purchasing Postitution 1 Sex Offenses(Except Rape) 229 Drug Abuse Violations(Total) 8866 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(SubTotal) 450 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Opium,Cocaine,Morphine,Heroin,Codeine) 209 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Marijuana) 60 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Synthetic Narcotics) 69 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Other Dangerous) 112 Drugs-Possession(SubTotal) 8416 Drugs-Possession(Opium,Cocaine,Morphine,Heroin,Codeine) 1638 Drugs-Possession(Marijuana) 4789 Drugs-Possession(Synthetic Narcotics) 680 Drugs-Possession(Other Dangerous) 1309 Gambling(Total) 73 Gambling Bookmaking-Horse/Sports 0 Gambling Numbers and Lottery 0 Gambling All Other Gambling 73 Offenses Against Family and Children 201 Driving Under the Influence 8315 Liquor Laws 929 Drunkenness 4309 Disorderly Conduct 357 Vagrancy 106 All Other Offenses(Except Traffic) Human Trafficking/Commercial Sex Acts 6 Human Trafficking/Involuntary Servitude 1 TOTALS Source: Texas Department of Public Safety Table 2.5: Regional Arrest Information by Category for Offenders Less Than 18 Years Old, 2015 # of Arrests Crime Murder/Nonnegligent Manslaughter 3 Manslaughter by Negligence 0 Rape 18 Robbery 85 Aggravated Assault 172 Burglary-Breaking or Entering 294 Larceny-Theft(Except Motor Vehicle) 1094 Motor Vehicle Theft 52 Other Assaults

19 Arson 11 Forgery/Counterfeiting 7 Fraud 27 Embezzlement 1 Stolen Property(Buy,Receive,Possess) 6 Vandalism 212 Weapons(Carry/Possess,etc) 50 Prostitution and Commercial Vice 3 Prostitution 3 Assisting or Promoting Protitution 0 Purchasing Postitution 0 Sex Offenses(Except Rape) 51 Drug Abuse Violations(Total) 1106 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(SubTotal) 64 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Opium,Cocaine,Morphine,Heroin,Codeine) 41 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Marijuana) 10 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Syntetic Narcotics) 7 Drugs-Sale/Manufacture(Other Dangerous) 6 Drugs-Possession(SubTotal) 1042 Drugs-Possession(Opium,Cocaine,Morphine,Heroin,Codeine) 73 Drugs-Possession(Marijuana) 796 Drugs-Possession(Synthetic Narcotics) 87 Drugs-Possession(Other Dangerous) 86 Gambling(Total) 2 Gambling Bookmaking-Horse/Sports 0 Gambling Numbers and Lottery 0 Gambling All Other Gambling 2 Offenses Against Family and Children 8 Driving Under the Influence 47 Liquor Laws 202 Drunkenness 55 Disorderly Conduct 109 Vagrancy 125 All Other Offenses(Except Traffic) 1306 Curfew and Loitering Law Violations 590 Runaway 269 Human Trafficking/Commercial Sex Acts 0 Human Trafficking/Involuntary Servitude 0 TOTALS 7080 Source: Texas Department of Public Safety 19

20 Section 3: An Overview of the CAPCOG Region 3.1 Regional Profile The CAPCOG Region is a diverse and unique region made up of many different types of people and businesses. While the region does have many similar characteristics to the State of Texas, and the Country as whole, there are many differences which make the region and the issues it faces unique. Table 3.1: Demographic Information CAPCOG Texas USA CAPCOG Texas USA Population 2,119,131 27,469, ,418,820 Population Annual Average Growth 3.1% 1.9% 0.8% 55, ,099 2,590,222 Median Age Under 18 Years 25.1% 27.3% 24.0% 459,786 6,865,824 74,181, to 24 Years 11.3% 10.2% 9.9% 207,374 2,572,969 30,672, to 34 Years 16.5% 14.4% 13.3% 301,478 3,613,473 41,063, to 44 Years 14.9% 13.8% 13.3% 271,969 3,458,382 41,070, to 54 Years 13.4% 13.7% 14.6% 244,644 3,435,336 45,006, to 64 Years 10.0% 10.3% 11.8% 182,267 2,597,691 36,482, to 74 Years 5.1% 5.9% 7.0% 94,224 1,472,256 21,713, Years, and Over 3.7% 4.5% 6.0% 68,261 1,129,630 18,554,555 Race: White 73.7% 70.4% 72.4% 1,349,543 17,701, ,553,265 Race: Black or African American 7.2% 11.8% 12.6% 131,783 2,979,598 38,929,319 Race: American Indian and Alaska Native 0.8% 0.7% 0.9% 14, ,972 2,932,248 Race: Asian 4.5% 3.8% 4.8% 82, ,596 14,674,252 Race: Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 1,398 21, ,013 Race: Some Other Race 10.6% 10.5% 6.2% 193,383 2,628,186 19,107,368 Race: Two or More Races 3.1% 2.7% 2.9% 56, ,001 9,009,073 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 30.5% 37.6% 16.3% 558,725 9,460,921 50,477,594 Source: Jobs EQ: Table 3.1 shows that people in CAPCOG are younger than people in the rest of the Country and the State of Texas, with 67.8% of the people in CAPCOG under the age of 45, compared to 65.7% of Texans and 60.5% of Americans. The region is also growing almost twice as fast as the State, and close to four times as fast as the USA. CAPCOG has a significantly greater percentage of Hispanics and Latinos when compared to the nation as a whole, but is still 7% less than Texas. The percentage of Hispanic or Latino people varies greatly by county in the region with almost 50% of residents in Caldwell County being Hispanic or Latino, while less than 10% of Llano County residents identify as Hispanic or Latino. Table 2.2 shows CAPCOG is a more educated region when comparing its residents years old to Texas and the USA, with 45.4% and 31.7% more of its residents having a bachelor s or postgraduate 20

21 degree respectively. One reason for this difference is the fact that there are a number of colleges and universities in the region, including 2 four year universities, and a community college with over 30,000 students enrolled. The extensive network of college options means that the percentage of people not attending any college is much less in CAPCOG than people attending college in Texas and the United States. Table 3.2: Educational Attainment of People Age CAPCOG TEXAS USA CAPCOG TEXAS USA No High School Diploma 11.3% 17.1% 12.0% 122,316 2,319,575 19,939,890 High School Graduate 19.5% 24.7% 26.5% 209,934 3,357,076 44,000,387 Some College, No Degree 21.8% 23.2% 21.9% 234,770 3,145,643 36,270,359 Associate's Degree 6.7% 7.1% 8.7% 72, ,102 14,487,486 Bachelor's Degree 27.2% 18.9% 19.7% 292,771 2,560,609 32,646,533 Postgraduate Degree 13.5% 9.1% 11.2% 145,317 1,234,968 18,533,513 Source: Jobs EQ Table 3.3: Social Demographics CAPCOG Texas USA CAPCOG Texas USA Enrolled in Grade 12 (% of total population) 1.3% 1.5% 1.4% 24, ,063 4,443,768 Disconnected Youth 2.9% 3.7% 3.3% 3,026 55, ,277 Children in Single Parent Families (% of all children) 30.5% 35.3% 34.7% 139,591 2,347,636 24,388,185 Disabled, Age % 9.9% 10.2% 107,117 1,576,781 19,703,061 Disabled, Age 18-64, Labor Force Participation Rate and Size 51.5% 44.3% 41.2% 55, ,211 8,119,295 Foreign Born 14.2% 16.5% 13.1% 276,786 4,296,948 41,056,885 Speak English Less Than Very Well (population 5 yrs and over) 10.5% 14.2% 8.6% 190,777 3,435,260 25,305,202 Source: Jobs EQ In Table 3.3 we see that CAPCOG has a smaller percentage of disconnected youth than both Texas and the USA at 2.9% of 16 to 19 year olds. Disconnected youth are people ages 16 to 19 who are not high school graduates, not in school, and either unemployed or not in the labor market. Figure 3.1 shows the percentage of disconnected youth by county in CAPCOG, there are 3 counties which have a much greater percentage of disconnected youth than CAPCOG, the State, and the Country, Caldwell at 10.5%, Llano at 9.2%, and Lee at 5.7%. While in Fayette, and Blanco Counties only 0.4% of the 16 to 19 year olds are considered disconnected, which is much less than all of the other counties in the CAPCOG region. The region also has a smaller percentage of children in single parent families, with 30.5% in CAPCOG, 35.3% in Texas, and 34.7% in the USA. The State of Texas has a larger percentage of people born outside 21

22 the US than the Country as a whole, but CAPCOG is closer to the nation s percentage than it is to the State s percentage of foreign born residents, at 14.2% of residents born outside the USA. Foreign born residents seem to concentrate in the most densely populated counties in the region with Travis County by far the most densely populated county in CAPCOG, with close to a fifth of all residents born outside the United States. Williamson and Bastrop Counties are the only other counties with foreign born residents making up over a tenth of their residents (just over 11% in both counties), and they are the second and fourth most populated counties in the region. Figure 3.1: Percentage of Disconnected Youth in CAPCOG by County Source: Jobs EQ 3.2 Population and Growth of the CAPCOG Region The CAPCOG region has grown steadily over the past 4 and half decades. Since 1970, the region s overall population has increased by 371.2%, from roughly 450,000 residents to just over an estimated 2.1 million residents in 2015, as shown below in Figure

23 The population change has been unevenly distributed, as Table 3.4 below demonstrates. For instance, Travis County (as the primary county of the Austin-Round Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)) has consistently held the highest population of the region. However, as Figure 3.5 shows, Williamson County has shown by far the highest rates of growth across decades, followed by Hays County, which is largely to the south of the Austin city limits but contains significant portions of the Austin-Round Rock MSA. High growth in these two counties highlights the continuing expansion of population into the outlying areas of the Austin MSA. By contrast, counties such as Lee, Fayette, and Caldwell have shown a more modest growth rate which can be seen by looking at Figure 3.4. One trend that is noticed when looking at Figures 3.4 and 3.5 is that larger counties in the region are growing faster than the smaller counties in the region, with the 5 largest counties having grown by at least 250% since While, of the five smallest counties only Blanco County has grown by over 200% over this time. Figure 3.2: Total Regional Population, ,500,000 Regional Population, ,000,000 1,500,000 1,000, , Source: Census Bureau 23

24 Table 3.4: Population per County, Area Bastrop 25,082 35,545 38,260 44,353 58,234 68,769 74,347 80,527 Blanco 4,683 5,376 5,964 7,458 8,495 8,947 10,512 11,004 Burnet 17,905 22,368 22,654 27,931 34,505 40,958 42,802 45,463 Caldwell 23,779 26,572 26,277 29,635 32,378 36,216 38,084 40,522 Fayette 19,032 21,356 20,028 21,025 21,864 22,366 24,520 25,110 Hays 41,093 56,225 65,767 78,389 99, , , ,739 Lee 11,246 14,082 12,811 14,015 15,701 16,210 16,610 16,898 Llano 10,121 11,885 11,684 12,725 17,077 17,958 19,341 19,796 Travis 421, , , , , ,185 1,030,219 1,176,558 Williamson 77, , , , , , , ,514 Source: Census Bureau Figure 3.3: Growth Rate Across CAPCOG Counties, (5 Least Populated Counties) % % % Blanco Caldwell % Lee Llano Fayette 50.00% 0.00% % Source: Census Bureau 24

25 Axis Title Figure 3.4: Growth Rate Across CAPCOG Counties, (5 Most Populated Counties) % % % % % % Hays Travis Williamson Bastrop Burnet % 0.00% Source: Census Bureau 3.3 Migration In and Out of the Region The information below allows for an analysis of gross population trends. However, it does not assess the source of population growth in the region. Through information provided by the American Community Survey, net population change can be calculated based on total out-migration and in-migration on an annual basis, separate from total births and deaths and from in-migration from outside of the United States. The location of this migration can be mapped at the national level. In the tables and figures below we examine migration into and out of the 10 Counties in the CAPCOG region, and provide some insight into the migration patterns of the fastest and slowest growing counties in CAPCOG. As Figure 3.3 demonstrates, Fayette County has historically shown the lowest rate of population increase from 1970 to Table 3.5 shows that Fayette County had the second fewest people migrating in and out, Blanco County is the only county with fewer people migrating in and out. Just under 1,000 people moved from other locations in the United States to Fayette County from 2009 to A little over 600 people moved to another location in the United States from Fayette County during the same time, for a net US migration of 362 people to Fayette County from 2009 to The majority, 82.6%, of the US migration to and from Fayette County was conducted by people who stayed in the State of Texas, or moved to Fayette County from other counties in the State. Now by comparison, Williamson County exhibited the fastest growth rate across all counties in the CAPCOG region. As Table 3.5 demonstrates, Williamson County had the second most people moving in and out of the county from 2009 to 2013, with Travis County the only county with more people migrating in and out. However, with net domestic migration of 17,309 Williamson County has the 25

26 greatest net domestic migration of any County in the CAPCOG region. While a significant portion of residents have migrated from other major metropolitan areas in Texas (notably the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex and Houston-Harris County areas) many have migrated in from places such as the greater Chicago area, New York, Southern California, Silicon Valley, Seattle and the greater Phoenix area. 71.7% the migration to and from this County was conducted by people who stayed in Texas, or moved from elsewhere in Texas. Table 3.5: Migration in CAPCOG, Moved into County from Another State Moved to a County in Another State Moved into County from a Texas County Moved to Another County in Texas Net Domestic Migration Moved to County from Outside the US County Llano ,100 1, Burnet ,806 2, Blanco Fayette Bastrop ,969 3, Lee , Caldwell ,492 2,626 2, Hays 2,902 2,408 17,653 10,654 7, Travis 30,340 21,309 51,610 49,561 11,080 10,146 Williamson 14,693 6,042 30,565 21,907 17,309 2,803 Source: American Community Survey

27 Figure 3.5: Migration for Bastrop County, Source: American Community Survey Figure 3.6: Migration for Blanco County, Source: American Community Survey

28 Figure 3.7: Migration for Burnet County, Source: American Community Survey Figure 3.8: Migration for Caldwell County, Source: American Community Survey

29 Figure 3.9: Migration for Fayette County, Source: American Community Survey Figure 3.10: Migration for Hays County, Source: American Community Survey

30 Figure 3.11: Migration for Lee County, Source: American Community Survey Figure 3.12: Migration for Llano County, Source: American Community Survey

31 Figure 3.13: Migration for Travis County, Source: American Community Survey Figure 3.14: Migration for Williamson County, Source: American Community Survey

32 One common migration trend in the region is the expansion of the Austin Metro Area as people continue to move to central Texas. One trend with this expansion is people moving from Travis County to the surrounding counties. By looking at Figure 3.15 one can see that the only counties in the region that have more people moving to Travis County are Fayette and Llano Counties the 2 Counties furthest away from Travis County. In all of the other CAPCOG counties more people are leaving Travis County and moving to the surrounding Counties. One reason for this migration is the cost of living goes down as you move away from Austin. There are other reasons for why people move out of Travis County, part of the migration is just a desire for more space, and to get away from the hustle and bustle of the city. Travis County saw the greatest number of people moving from outside the US to the CAPCOG region, and because of the large amount of foreign migration to Travis County, the County has the greatest total net migration in the region with 21,226 more people moving to Travis County than moving out of Travis County from 2009 to Figure 3.15: Travis County Net Migration Flows Zoomed into CAPCOG Region, Source: American Community Survey

33 3.4 Economic Information The median household income in the CAPCOG region is $61,253, which is almost $10,000 more than the State and National median household income. The average household income in the region is $83,171, again almost $10,000 more than the State and National averages, and little over $20,000 more than the median. The fact that the median income is less than the mean income means that there are more households making less than the average income for the region than making more. When going by intervals of $25,000 the largest percentage household income in CAPCOG is between $25,000 and $50,000 with 22.1% of households falling into this income bracket. Households making less than $25,000 represent 19.1% of the households in CAPCOG. Based on table 3.6 one can infer that between 59.4% and 73.3% of households make less than regional average income of $83,171, and almost 60% of CAPCOG households make less than the national average of $74,596. The highest mean and median incomes by county in CAPCOG are concentrated along the I-35 corridor in Williamson, Travis, and Hays Counties. Table 3.6: CAPCOG Income CAPCOG Texas USA CAPCOG Texas USA Total Households 719,127 9,013, ,211,092 Less than $10, % 7.3% 7.2% 44, ,362 8,395,338 $10,000 to $14, % 5.3% 5.3% 29, ,437 6,189,386 $15,000 to $24, % 10.8% 10.7% 64, ,987 12,402,928 $25,000 to $34, % 10.5% 10.2% 64, ,362 11,870,709 $35,000 to $49, % 13.7% 13.5% 94,978 1,236,209 15,681,133 $50,000 to $74, % 17.8% 17.8% 130,842 1,602,282 20,719,319 $75,000 to $99, % 11.8% 12.2% 93,084 1,059,592 14,125,429 $100,000 to $149, % 12.9% 13.0% 108,512 1,161,024 15,123,755 $150,000 to $199, % 5.0% 5.0% 42, ,681 5,857,717 $200,000 or more 6.5% 5.0% 5.0% 46, ,646 5,845,378 Median Income (dollars) $61,253 $52,576 $53,482 Mean Income (dollars) $83,171 $73,913 $74,596 Source: Jobs EQ Figure 3.17 shows the percentage of household income on the extremes showing the percentage of households that are below the poverty level and the percentage of households that earn over $200,000 annually. Travis County has the greatest percentage of households making over $200,000 with 7.7% of residents in this income range and is close to having the greatest percentage of households living in poverty at 17.5% of residents. The fact that the county is ranked very high in regards to both extremes suggests that it is likely the county with greatest disparity in income in the CAPCOG region. Williamson County which has both the highest mean and median income is the county with the fewest households living in poverty, and the second most households earning more than $200,000. Caldwell County is the county with the most households below the poverty line, and the county with the smallest percentage of households earning over $200,000. Caldwell, also has the smallest gap between the median and 33

34 average income for its households this is a good indicator that it has the smallest income disparity in the region. Figure 3.16: County by County Median Income Map Source: Jobs EQ 34

35 Figure 3.17: County by County Income Extremes Maps Source: Jobs EQ 35

36 The CAPCOG region hosts a high number and an elevated diversity of employers. Urban counties such as Travis and Williamson have higher professional and technical service employers, as these tech corridors host computer hardware and semiconductor manufacturing facilities, such as Dell Computers, National Instruments, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), and Freescale. These type of jobs are usually higher paying and help to give Williamson and Travis the highest mean incomes in the region when comparing the 10 counties in CAPCOG. Rural counties, such as Caldwell, Burnet, and Lee tend to host higher proportions of construction and mining/quarry businesses. Table A.1 in Appendix A shows the number of private sector employment establishments throughout the region by North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code and description as of As the data shows, most employers in the CAPCOG region are classified as Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services (NAICS Code: 54). Table A.2 details the specific categories that fall under this designation, and the number of employers and employees for each. Table A.3 further details the number of employees within each 2- digit NAICS code classification in the region, again for the year As this table shows, while professional, scientific and technical services provide a greater number of places of employment across the CAPCOG region, more individuals are employed within educational services in the region. These employees include not only primary, secondary, and higher learning institutional instructors, but also employees of standardized exam preparatory services, language schools, flight training, and cosmetology schools. Table 3.7: Unemployment in CAPCOG CAPCOG Texas USA CAPCOG Texas USA Total 6.8% 7.7% 9.2% 72, ,580 14,504,781 Age 16 to 19 years 25.2% 25.2% 27.1% 8, ,680 1,736, to 21 years 12.3% 15.2% 17.7% 5,189 80,887 1,109, to 24 years 10.1% 12.0% 13.9% 6,684 99,424 1,373, to 29 years 7.1% 8.4% 10.3% 9, ,507 1,784, to 34 years 6.0% 7.0% 8.6% 8, ,573 1,471, to 44 years 4.8% 5.8% 7.4% 11, ,113 2,466, to 54 years 5.3% 5.5% 7.0% 11, ,922 2,490, to 59 years 6.0% 5.5% 6.6% 4,943 59, , to 61 years 5.9% 5.5% 6.8% 1,567 18, , to 64 years 6.6% 5.2% 6.3% 1,891 19, , to 69 years 5.1% 5.0% 6.3% 1,153 15, , to 74 years 5.4% 5.0% 6.0% 468 6, , year and over 4.5% 4.4% 5.7% 249 3,448 65,093 Gender, 16 to 64 Years Male 7.1% 7.6% 9.7% 39, ,022 7,639,655 Female 6.6% 8.0% 9.0% 30, ,700 6,423,926 Race and Ethnicity, 16 to 64 Years White 6.5% 6.9% 8.0% 52, ,306 9,036,744 36

37 Black or African American 10.4% 13.0% 16.3% 7, ,932 2,959,338 American Indian and Alaska Native 6.0% 9.8% 16.1% 287 5, ,558 Asian 5.8% 5.7% 7.1% 2,875 30, ,896 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 3.3% 11.6% 13.4% 17 1,229 34,845 Some Other Race 9.1% 8.9% 11.6% 5,146 71, ,731 Two or More Races 9.1% 11.0% 13.5% 2,011 24, ,469 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 7.9% 8.4% 11.0% 23, ,475 2,708,552 Source: Jobs EQ The CAPCOG region has been close to full employment with an unemployment rate of 6.8% from 2010 to 2014, which is less than the unemployment rates for both Texas, 7.7%, and the USA, 9.2% during that time. Like with the United States and the State of Texas, unemployment amongst people age 16 to 19 is far greater than unemployment for any other age range. Unemployment in this age range is more than double that of any other age range provided in Table 3.7. From Table 3.7 one can see that unemployment decreases in the age ranges up to the 45 to 54 range, at this point unemployment starts to increase as the age ranges increase until the range 65 to 69 when unemployment decreases again, with people 75 years and over having the lowest unemployment rate in the CAPCOG region. Black or African American people, people identifying with 2 or more races, people identifying as a race not listed, and Hispanic or Latino people are more likely to be unemployed than the region as a whole. While, white people, American Indian and Alaska Native people, Asian people, and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander people are less likely to be unemployed than the region as a whole. Table 3.8: Unemployment by County in CAPCOG, August 2016 Region Labor Force Employed Unemployed Unemployment Rate Bastrop County 38,608 37,010 1, % Blanco County 5,902 5, % Burnet County 21,389 20, % Caldwell County 18,163 17, % Fayette County 12,502 11, % Hays County 99,451 95,808 3, % Lee County 9,314 8, % Llano County 8,447 8, % Travis County 681, ,258 22, % Williamson County 269, ,234 9, % CAPCOG 1,164,903 1,123,931 40, % Source: Jobs EQ Table 3.8 provides information on the regions labor force for August 2016, indicating that unemployment rates in the region are even lower than they were from 2010 to Most likely 37

38 because the region has experienced job growth since that time as the economy recovers from the Great Recession which impacted the US starting in All of the regions counties are experiencing very low unemployment rates ranging from 4.6% to 3.3%. The region as a whole has close to 1.2 million participants in the labor force and just under 41,000 unemployed for a regional unemployment rate of 3.5%. Figure 3.18: CAPCOG County Unemployment Map for year olds Source: Jobs EQ 38

39 Table 3.9: Economic Demographics CAPCOG TEXAS USA CAPCOG TEXAS USA Labor Force Participation Rate and Size (civilian population 16 years and over) % 64.4% 63.5% 1,053,842 12,791, ,940,014 Armed Forces Labor Force 4 0.1% 0.5% 0.4% 2,180 97,573 1,025,497 Veterans, Age % 5.9% 5.8% 73, ,863 11,371,344 Median Household Income 3,4 $61,253 $52,576 $53,482 Per Capita Income 3,4 $31,786 $26,513 $28,555 Poverty Level (of all people) % 17.7% 15.6% 284,627 4,500,034 47,755,606 Households Receiving Food Stamps 4 9.3% 13.5% 13.0% 67,096 1,218,803 15,089,358 Mean Commute Time (minutes) Commute via Public Transportation 4 2.3% 1.6% 5.1% 22, ,962 7,157,671 Union Membership 5 4.0% 5.0% 11.1% Source: Jobs EQ From Table 3.9 one can also see that Capital Area residents over 16 are more likely to participate in the labor force than people from other parts of Texas, or the United States. Part of this participation could come from the fact the population of CAPCOG is younger than people who live in the rest of Texas and the United States. Table 3.9 also shows that CAPCOG has a smaller portion of people below the poverty level and on food stamps than Texas, and the Country as a whole. 39

40 Section 4: Past Grant Funding to the Region 4.1 Available Data CJD records information provided by grant applicants on total funding, types of victims served, and activities performed with the grant funding. The data on victims served is only available for the General Victim s Assistance and Violent Crimes Against Women programs, and is available for a nine year period between 2008 and 2016, for consistency we have provided information on victims served for a 3 year period from The activity data is available for this same 3 year period for all for CJD grants that CAPCOG s CJAC helps select. CAPCOG cross-linked funding with activity and victim information and provided analysis to criminal justice planners in the regional strategic planning workshops in order to inform the prioritization process. The purpose was to examine the balance between priority program activities and funding. Mismatches would suggest needed changes in the regional priorities. Regarding activities, it was determined that crisis services is often used to describe several of the other activity categories, making it difficult to make clear cut determinations. For example, legal services are sometimes provided by grantees under the crisis services label. Future data mining could attempt to more accurately report this data by manually reviewing funded applications. The criminal justice planners generally felt that the victims served and activities provided fell in line with the current State and regional priorities. However, peer support groups, shelter, technology improvements, and medical support and training are program activities that may not have received funding in the past in line with their current priority rankings. Figure 4.1: General Victims Assistance Grants CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, Crisis Services, $2,489, Multi-Disciplinary Teams and Case Coordination, $59, Protective Order Assistance, $86, Shelter, $1,429, Legal Advocacy, $1,111, Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division Peer Support Groups, $134, Victim-Offender Meetings, $199, Forensic Interviews, $250, Professional Therapy and Counseling, $887,

41 Figure 4.2: General Victims Assistance Grants, Funding by Victim Served < $100,000, $80, $70, $68, $60, $58, $50, $40, $38, $30, $20, $22, $10, $3, $6, $8, $0.00 DUI/DWI Crashes Survivors of Homicide Elder Abuse Assault Human Trafficking Stalking Dating Violence Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division 41

42 Figure 4.3: General Victims Assistance Grants, Funding by Victim Served > $100,000, $4,500, $4,201, $4,000, $3,500, $3,000, $2,500, $2,000, $1,500, $1,000, $773, $815, $500, $143, $252, $0.00 Robbery Adults Molested as Children Sexual Assault Child Abuse Domestic Abuse Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division Figure 4.4: Violent Crimes Against Women Grant in the CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, $450, $400, $396, $350, $300, $250, $200, $150, $153, $100, $50, $29, $63, $70, $93, $0.00 Protective Order Assistance Legal Advocacy Training Multi-Disiplinary Teams and Case Coordination Prosecution Crisis Services Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division 42

43 Figure 4.5: Violent Crimes Against Women Grants CAPCOG Region, Funding by Victim Served, Stalking, $61, Dating/Acquaintance, $147, Sexual Assault, $640, Domestic Abuse, $4,939, Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division Figure 4.6: Justice Assistance Grant in the CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, Technology, $548, Prosecution, $123, Investigation, $82, Equipment, $1,013, Response to Mental Health Calls, $63, Training, $152, Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division 43

44 Figure 4.7: Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Grant in the CAPCOG Region, Funding by Activity, School Based Delinquency Prevention, $238, Job Training, $338, Diversion, $208, Professional Therapy and Counseling, $302, Substance Abuse, $186, Source: egrants Texas, Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division 44

45 Section 5: Regional Criminal Justice Planning Process and Priorities 5.1 Planning Process CAPCOG facilitated the region s first ever criminal justice strategic plan in December Prior to the Plan Year 2015 plan, community-based plans were used to determine regional priorities for the Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice Division (CJD) grants. After a year of funded projects and new issues to consider, the region initiated a new planning process. On October 4 th and 5 th, 2016, two Regional Stakeholder Outreach Meetings were conducted, one in the morning on the 4 th and one in the afternoon on the 5 th with 41 participants total. The goals of the meetings were to: a) Create a comprehensive list of all opinions on revisions to the previous plan; b) Develop consensus of needed changes to the plan and priorities; and c) Discuss grant-related issues for Criminal Justice Advisory Committee (CJAC) and CJD consideration. After a presentation of the results of the FY 2017 CAPCOG Criminal Justice Needs Survey, updated crime statistics and data on previous grant funding to the region, participants worked in small groups representing the following disciplines: 1. Criminal Justice System Improvements 2. Juvenile Justice System Improvements 3. Direct Victim Services 4. Mental Health/Substance Abuse Treatment The group representing juvenile justice system improvements also discussed school based system improvements, as these 2 disciplines are similar. The groups discussed and developed priority lists based on needs in their communities, and the data and information provided in the presentation. After the group discussion a representative of each group shared their input with the rest of the other groups which were given the opportunity to provide additional input on the priorities in disciplines in which they did not participate in the small group discussion. CAPCOG staff worked to mesh the lists developed during both stakeholder meetings into a priority list for comparison with the priorities from last year. The CJAC met November 2, 2016 and listened to a presentation on the information to be included in the plan and were asked to help with the finalization of the regional priorities. After some discussion of the priorities, members of the CJAC provided a few suggestions to improve the priorities developed during the stakeholder meeting. Where possible, data sources were identified to best drive analysis of regional needs with consideration to resource gaps, trends in type of problem, and priorities of relevant funding sources. This data is also 45

46 included in this plan to aid applicants in applying for criminal justice funding from the Office of the Governor s Criminal Justice Division. 5.2 Regional Planning Stakeholder Meeting Participants The regional priorities identified in this Regional Strategic Plan were the result of direct input from the following stakeholders: Name Dean Higginbotham Margaret Buentello Heather Dooley David Repka Amy Durall Sherry Murphy Coni Stogner Tracy Lyke James Allen Marco Ochoa Kachina Clark Rebecca Lange Billy Fletcher Michael Maugere Lauren Jones Tiffany Hall Dimple Malhotra Kyran Fitzgerald Kristin Davidson Melissa Hightower Glenn Hanson Kelly Sheridan Patty Conner Steve Eckstein James Harrison Brita Wallace Marc Bittner Patricia Garcia Stacy Bruce Sonny McAfee Cheryl Pounds Ted Young Organization Williamson County Hays County Travis County SO Smithville PD Travis County SO Family Crisis Center SAFE Alliance (Safe Place) Round Rock PD Manor PD Travis County Attorney s Office Austin PD Victim Services Llano County Attorney Leander PD Smithville PD Family Crisis Center Round Rock PD Travis County Attorney s Office Austin PD Williamson County Juvenile Services Williamson County Attorney Marble Falls PD Kyle PD HOPE Alliance Marble Falls PD Jonestown PD Williamson County Attorney 33rd & 424 th Judicial District Travis County Juvenile Probation SAFE/ Austin Children s Shelter 33rd District Attorney Marble Falls Municipal Court Marble Falls PD 46

47 Bobi DeLancey Caryn Moya-Candrey Laura Gold Catherina Conte Karen Trietsch Vanorda Richardson Melinda Cantu Aja Gair Highland Lakes Legal Center Travis Conty Juvenile Probation ATCIC Asian Family Support Services YWCA Travis County Juvenile Probation Safe Place Austin Children s Shelter/ SAFE 5.3 Regional Priorities The following are the regional priorities that CAPCOG identified with the assistance of the CJAC, and input from two Regional Stakeholder Outreach Meetings and the FY 2017 Criminal Justice Regional Needs Survey. Where possible or necessary, CAPCOG has provided additional research for identified regional priorities. Note that while an effort was made to include only priorities that are eligible for CJD funding, regional priorities may or may not be allowable activities under the eligibility criteria established by the funding sources. Please refer to the official RFA for eligibility and allowable activity. Criminal Justice System Improvements Regional Priorities Training local trainings with regional partners covering topics like social media and community policing, human trafficking, crime analysis, active shooter, mental health issues, interdiction training Technological Improvements support courts/ prosecutors getting digital data from cops/ cloud, hardware, increased bandwidth, software licensing/ site licensing, crime analyst technology, field level technology like in car computers and in car video system, upgrades to security of criminal justice buildings and employee parking areas, forensic labs and equipment, criminal justice information systems, offender tracking, communications equipment, electronic search warrant capabilities, cell phone dumping, evidence room upgrades, recording cameras Mental Health Services mental health screening in jails to catch those missed at other steps, diversion tools and trainings for targeted populations, co-response teams/ multidisciplinary teams, mental health first aid training, stabilization of care Outreach/ Education provide strategies to the public for reducing and hardening against crime, outreach software and services to educate and inform the public, flyers and public service announcements targeting all crime Programmatic Personnel interdiction personnel, crime scene technicians, civilian and police investigators, crisis intervention teams, to provide specialty services Specialty Services veterans services, indigent defense funds, bridge housing, investigations to look at/ follow up on old cases Regional Law Enforcement and Prosecutorial Strategies blood draw/ warrant programs, violent offense investigations, repeat offender programs Juvenile Justice System Improvements Regional Priorities Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking policy advocacy, specialized placement for DMST victims, identification of victims, peer/ survivor mentor programs, training for officers and educators, 47

48 public education on what trafficking looks like, developing and training for use of electronic screening, parent education and training Mental Health Trauma informed counselors and therapists, psychiatric services for youth, mental health officers, juvenile psychiatric emergency services, psychiatric and substance abuse treatments, in-patient facilities, trust based relational intervention, telemedicine, mentor programs, wrap around services, respite, parent education and training, targeted case management Programmatic Personnel Officers, Mental Health Officers, patrol/ security to facilities, mental health professionals in schools, hospitals, and shelters, training for existing staff, peer parents, parent education trainer Re-entry/ Aftercare transitional and independent living, housing specialized also for sex offenders, job training, employment coaches/ specialists, employment supports and education, young adult services and programming, prosocial recreational and leisure activities, parent education and training Community Supports evidence based practices, respite, bilingual parent services, parent education, parent coaches, substance abuse peer support, prosocial recreational and leisure activities, bi-lingual therapists, translating/ interpreting services Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender/ Diversity Services specialized services, training for officers, schools, and peers, parent education and training School Based peer mentoring programs, job training outside the classroom, summer camps, after school activities, and Children of Incarcerated Parents (CIP) Programs, healthy relationship education, parent education and training, violence prevention, close the school-to-prison pipeline Direct Victim Services Regional Priorities Programmatic Personnel counselors, legal and other advocates, attorneys for civil cases, translators, sexual assault nurse examiners (SANE) nurses, supervision/ debriefing support for direct service staff, advocates based in county and/ or district attorney s office and law enforcement departments, forensic interviewers Multicultural/ Multilingual Support Services there is a need for multicultural/multilingual accommodations, interpreters and assistance personnel in all areas victims interact with (support services, law enforcement, and criminal justice) Training cross-training for parent service providers, SANE services, for law enforcement on how to handle different victims, stakeholder specific trainings for law enforcement, medical/ behavioral health practitioners, school personnel, and youth services, safety/ lethality protocols such as firearm concerns, prosecution and staff training, judges and judicial staff training, and other special service provider trainings Public Education and Awareness violence prevention in schools and with youth, for healthcare providers on domestic violence and sexual assault, violence prevention education staff and materials, needs of culturally specific communities Basic Victim Services emergency and long term shelters, transitional housing, SANE coordination and equipment, crisis intervention, transportation services, access to service, affordable housing options Technological Improvements technology to identify GPS trackers in vehicles, jammers for drones, portable recording cameras for victims, mobile technology for use with victims in the field, shared database between criminal justice partners for all victims/ offenders data, 48

49 evaluation of best videoing practices throughout the investigative process, interpretation/ translation technology, database improvements, safety alert devices for victims Mental Health/ Substance Treatment Regional Priorities Supportive Recovery Services treatment and recovery from substance abuse and/ or trauma, diversion programs, assessors and case workers in jails to work with individuals with mental health issues to help find services and follow up after release, gap analysis to identify lack of service availability, map out process of identification of mental health needs to services, crisis residence for mental health emergencies, individualized long-term case management and support, family support, early intervention programs, transportation, telemedicine Housing for families of persons with mental health needs, provide stable living situation for homeless with mental health needs, transitional housing, housing availability/ stock, provide appropriate housing based on mental health needs, longer term support to ensure long term housing success Training Mental Health Public Defender Programs, provide social worker(s) or case worker(s) to law enforcement agency, provide training to law enforcement, attorneys, and others in the criminal justice system, educate landlords about tenants with mental health issues, life skills training, outreach and education Indigent Defense specialized training for public defenders/ court appointed officials on working with individuals with mental health issues, psychiatric services Programmatic Personnel inter-agency collaboration Crisis Respite Centers jail/emergency room diversion programs and regional support for overflows, programs to provide facilities and services as soon as possible after law enforcement intervention, case management 49

50 Appendix A: NAICS Establishment and Employment Data Table A.1: Places of Employment in CAPCOG Region by NAICS category, NAICS Code NAICS Code Description # of Establishments % of Total Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting % Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction % Utilities % Construction 4, % Manufacturing 1, % Wholesale trade 3, % Retail trade 5, % Transportation and warehousing % Information 1, % Finance and insurance 3, % Real estate and rental and leasing 2, % Professional, scientific, and technical services 10, % Management of companies and enterprises % Administrative and support and waste management and remediation services 3, % Educational services % Health care and social assistance 6, % Arts, entertainment, and recreation % Accommodation and food services 4, % Other services (except public administration) 5, % Public Administration % Industries not classified % ---- TOTAL 56, % Source: Jobs EQ 1 County Business Pattern data does not include public sector employees. 50

51 Table A.2: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services NAICS 4-digit sub-categories 4- digit NAICS Code Category Description Establishments Employees 5411 Legal Services 1,457 9, Accounting Services 902 5, Architectural and Engineering 1,251 13, Specialized/Interior/Graphic Design 331 1, Computer Systems Design 2,804 32, Management, Scientific, & Technical 2,286 11, Consulting 5417 Scientific Research & Development 246 4, Advertising & Public Relations 480 4, Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 524 5, Source: Jobs EQ Average # of Employees per Establishment 2 2 Taken by dividing number employees by number of establishments in Table

52 Table A.3: Number of Employees by NAICS category in CAPCOG Region, 2015 NAICS Code # of Employees Average # of Employees per Establishment 2 % of Total NAICS Code Description Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 1, % Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 5, % Utilities 7, % Construction 57, % Manufacturing 60, % Wholesale Trade 46, % Retail Trade 103, % Transportation and Warehousing 17, % Information 27, % Finance and Insurance 38, % Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 17, % Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 90, % Management of Companies and Enterprises 5, % Administration & Support, Waste Management 61, % and Remediation Educational Services 95, % Health Care and Social Assistance 106, % Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 16, % Accommodation and Food Services 106, % Other Services (excluding Public Administration) 33, % Public Administration 58, % Industries not classified % TOTAL 958, % Source: Jobs EQ 52

53 Appendix B: Survey Results The following is the results from the Regional Criminal Justice Needs Survey. The survey addresses the priority categories identified by the CJD. The survey was developed to gain input from a broader range of stakeholders than those that are able to attend the stakeholder meetings held at the CAPCOG offices. The survey was developed starting with last year s survey and the soliciting input from CAPCOG s Criminal Justice Advisory Committee to make it more representative of the region. The results of the survey, which was open from September 14 th to October 2 nd, 2016, are below. Respondents Below is the list of people who responded to the survey and included their name, position, and organization. 11 people responded to the survey but did not include this information. Name Title Organization Marc Bittner Chief Juvenile Probation Officer Blanco, Burnet, Gillespie, Llano, and San Saba Counties Alma Lahmon Executive Director Highland Lakes Family Crisis Center Jay Monkerud Chief Juvenile Probation Officer Caldwell County CARRIE LEWIS LEGAL ASSISTANT LLANO COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Daniel Smith Director of Inmate mental health, counseling and education Travis County Sheriff Hosie Washington Grants Managerr SafePlace Wendie Abramson Chief Quality Officer The SAFE Alliance Bobi DeLancey Wanda Ivicic Chief Victim Assistance Coordinator Williamson County Attorney's Office Ruhee Leonard Civil Attorney Williamson County Attorney's Office Michael Maugere Chief of Police Smithville Police Department Jill Strube Grants Administrator City of Smithville Kathryn Geiger Director of inmate Medical Services for the Travis County Sheriff's Office Travis County Sheriff's Office Heather Dooley Victim Services Specialist, Sr. Travis County Sheriff's Office- Victim Services Unit Amy Durall Victim Services Director Travis County Sheriff's Office Michael Gottner Admin Support Bureau Major Travis County Sheriff's Office Jeff Hauff Grants Administrator Hays County Juanita Budd Executive Director Asutin Free- Net Donna Orsag Lee County CAPCOG member Non profit Catherina Conte Client Services Program Director Asian Family Support Services of Austin 53

54 Michael Cox Assistant County Attorney Williamson County Attorney Office Mirna Johnson Victim Services Coordinator Leander Police Department Stephanie Greger Criminal Division Chief Williamson County Attorney's Office David Crowder Captain Lakeway Police Dept. David Repka Lieutenant Smithville Police Dept. Wiley (Sonny) McAfee District Attorney 33rd/ 424th District Attorney's Office Megan Klaeger Attorney Teresa Williams-Carr Grants Manager Austin Children's Shelter Rebecca Ray Program Director HCWS Jennifer Vasquez Counseling and Resource Program Director HCWC Cory Tchida Assistant Chief of Police Georgetown Police Department Ricky Jorgensen City Manager City of Giddings Chase Stapp Chief of Police San Marcos Police Quinn WIlson Adult Probation Officer Burnet County Adult Probation Laura Gold, LCSW-S Prevention Services Program Manager Austin Travis County Integral Care (ATCIC) Billy Fletcher Lieutenant Leander Police Department Linda Meigs Advocate Williamson County Mental Health Task Force Michael Maugere Chief of Police Smithville Police Department Mary Cunningham County Judge Llano County Dean Higginbotham Program Director Victim Assistance Williamson County Sheriff's Office Kristin Davidson Prevention Coordinator Williamson County Juvenile Services Crystal Hall Trooper DPS THP Samuel Padgett Game Warden Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Sherry Murphy Executive Director Family Crisis Center Angela Lala Investigator Fayette County Sheriff's Office Alice Thomas Assistant Director Austin Police Department Erwin Sladek John Neff Chief Deputy Llano County Sheriff's Office Cheryl Pounds Municipal Judge City of Marble Falls Deanna Jordan Legal Assistant Llano County Attorney Office Toni Anderson Legal Assistant Llano County Attorney's Office Andy McKinney Lieutenant Round Rock PD James Harrison Police Chief City of Jonestown 54

55 Jerome Reese Supervision Supervisor Bastrop County Juvenile Services Kim Cabazos BIPP Family Crisis Center Joe E. Canady Chief Deputy Burnet County Sheriff's Office Kyran Fitzgerald Grants Manager Austin Police Department Angela-Jo Touza- Medina Executive Director YWCA Greater Austin Tracy Spinner Assistant Director, Health Austin ISD Paul Pape County Judge Bastrop County Sean Johnson Lieutenant Round Rock Police Department Willie Richards Commander Round Rock Police Dept Rochelle Pearce Victim Advocate Round Rock Police Dept. Tracy Lyke Victim Services Coordinator Round Rock Police Department Cliff Saylor Support Services Division Manager Round Rock Police Department Greg Minton Chief of Police Leander Police Department Patty Conner CEO Williamson County Crisis Center scott matthew executive director williamson county juvenile services Sean Mannix Chief of Police City of Cedar Park Annie Burwell Director of Mobile Outreach Williamson County Emergency Services Scott matthew Executive director Williamson county juvenile services Kenny Schnell Director Williamson County EMS 55

56 Background Information Please indicate your background (Check all that apply): Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Adult Probation 2.6% 2 Civic Organization 6.5% 5 College/University 6.5% 5 Concerned Citizen 10.4% 8 Courts/Prosecution 18.2% 14 CPS/APS 1.3% 1 Crime Victim/Service Recipient 3.9% 3 Early Childhood Education 3.9% 3 Education (K-12) 6.5% 5 Elected Official 5.2% 4 Employment/Workforce 2.6% 2 Faith-Based Organizations 2.6% 2 For-Profit Corporation 1.3% 1 Federal Agency 0.0% 0 Juvenile Probation 10.4% 8 Law Enforcement 45.5% 35 Legal Services 7.8% 6 Mental Health/ Mental Retardation Service Provider 7.8% 6 Non-Profit Agency 20.8% 16 Parent 10.4% 8 Parole/Probation (Adult) 1.3% 1 Private Sector 2.6% 2 Public Health 3.9% 3 Public Official (City Manager, Economic Development, ect.) 6.5% 5 Substance Abuse 2.6% 2 Other (please specify) 11.7% 9 answered question 77 skipped question 2 Others: Corrections Crime Victim Advocate Correctional Health for Inmate Population Victim Services County Grant Administration Department Children s Advocacy Community Mental Health Center Metal Health Advocate Emergency Medical Services 56

57 If you are completing this survey as part of an agency, check all counties that are served by your agency. If you are completing this survey as a citizen, select the county in which you reside: Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Bastrop 16.5% 13 Blanco 13.9% 11 Burnet 17.7% 14 Caldwell 10.1% 8 Fayette 10.1% 8 Hays 13.9% 11 Lee 10.1% 8 Llano 20.3% 16 Travis 34.2% 27 Williamson 39.2% 31 answered question 79 skipped question 0 57