MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.

Transcription

1 MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C. Pennsylvania JIEM Analysis Current and Future Exchange Models Phase II Day August 9, 5 Presented by: Mr. Robert E. Kaelin, Partner Mr. James E. Cabral Jr., Senior Manager

2 Introductions Welcome!» SEARCH / MTG.» PCCD Shay Larrisey and Dave Woolfenden.» CCAP Rita Reynolds» Participants. Proposed Two Day Timeframe» Day - : PM - 5: PM Introductions and Review of Phase I: hour. Summary of Phase II: / hours. Comparative Analysis: / hours.» Day 9: AM noon. Integration Opportunities: hour. Implementation Priorities: hour. Conclusions/Next Steps/Questions: hour.» Lunch. 59//86477(ppt)

3 Agenda A. Review of Phase I B. Summary of Phase II C. Comparative Analysis D. Integration Opportunities E. Implementation Priorities F. Conclusions G. Next Steps 59//86477(ppt)

4 Review of Phase I Process Started with the JIEM Reference Model. Documented existing county process as is models. Developed future to be model. Provided the online tool to CCAP. 59//86477(ppt) 3

5 Review of Phase I Summary The smallest county has the lowest volumes but the most exchanges and documents. The largest county has the highest volumes but the fewest exchanges and documents. Warren County Exchanges 67 Documents 5 Lancaster Allegheny //86477(ppt) 4

6 Review of Phase I Comparative Analysis Sample conversations:» Bindovers.» Expungements.» Extraditions.» Motions.» PSIs.» Victims. Other conversations:» ARDs.» Calendars.» Filings.» Grand juries.» Parole violations.» PDQs.» Releases.» Sentencings.» Summary appeals.» Transports. 59//86477(ppt) 5

7 Review of Phase I Example: Bindovers In Allegheny and Lancaster, the case, including the Criminal Complaint, is sent from the MDJ to the Jail and the Court, who sends it to the DA. Probation does not receive a copy of the Criminal Complaint. In Warren, the MDJ sends copies of the Criminal Complaint to the Court, Jail, and DA. The DA provides a copy of the Criminal Complaint to Probation. 59//86477(ppt) 6

8 Review of Phase I Example: Bindovers (continued) 59//86477(ppt) 7

9 Review of Phase I Integration Opportunities Common exchanges. Common documents. Combining exchanges/documents. 59//86477(ppt) 8

10 Review of Phase I Results Common Exchanges Volumes 3 High 9 Medium 4 Low in Bindovers in Extraditions in Filings in Miscellaneous 5 in Motions Conversation Diagrams in Parole Violations, Releases, Sentencings, and Summary Appeals Total 6 Common Documents 5 Yes 6 No Structured Documents? 7 Yes 4 No Time-Sensitive? Total 59//86477(ppt) 9

11 Review of Phase I Results (continued) Volumes 8 High 5 Medium 4 Low Combining Exchanges/Documents Conversation Diagrams 7 in Bindovers in Extraditions in ARDs in Motions in Filing, Parole Violations, Releases, and PSIs Total 7 59//86477(ppt)

12 Review of Phase I Focus We used the JIEM tool to:» Show the environment.» Derive needs.» Draft priorities. This approach allows us to create specific definitions for the key initiatives.» Each class or type of priorities should be a specific initiative.» Some classes or types may be divided into subgroups for a more manageable implementation. 59//86477(ppt)

13 Review of Phase I Guiding Principles. Legal and policy environment.. Available funding. 3. Leveraging of existing work (e.g., AOPC). 4. Conversations (groups of related exchanges) rather than individual exchanges. 5. Potential extension (e.g., technology). 6. Focus on time savings, cost savings, and safety. 59//86477(ppt)

14 Review of Phase I Criteria. High-volume common exchanges.. High-volume common documents. 3. High-volume common processes. 4. Time-sensitive documents. 5. Structured common documents. 6. Common exchanges. 7. Common documents. 8. Common processes. 9. Structured documents. 59//86477(ppt) 3

15 Review of Phase I Pilot Implementation Priorities Based on the criteria, we assigned each of the Phase I exchanges a high, medium, or low priority for implementation. Priority High Medium Low Exchanges 7 59//86477(ppt) 4

16 Review of Phase I Conclusions Significant differences in processes between counties limit opportunities for integration. Small changes to business processes can align counties and facilitate greater integration. The future model needs to be updated to reflect the guiding principles and priorities of the counties. 59//86477(ppt) 5

17 Review of Phase I Since March The project is now called the County Justice Information Exchange of Pennsylvania (CJIEP) (formerly the Justice Hub). A monthly newsletter is being produced for information updates. Architectural design is complete. The testing site at CCAP is complete (July). Detail design specifications will be finalized in August 5. Pilot implementation is slated to begin in the August/ September time frame. 59//86477(ppt) 6

18 Review of Phase I Since March (continued) Focus has been on five pilot exchanges:» Bind case over from the MDJ to the Court of Common Pleas (includes related intra-county MDJ to Jail, DA and Probation document exchanges).» Provide a parole decision.» Report probation sentence.» Inform that a subject s noncompliance resulted in sentence modification.» Inform that a subject s sentence is modified. 59//86477(ppt) 7

19 Agenda A. Review of Phase I B. Summary of Phase II C. Comparative Analysis D. Integration Opportunities E. Implementation Priorities F. Conclusions G. Next Steps 59//86477(ppt) 8

20 Original Scope of Phase II SEARCH/MTG had been engaged by PCCD to conduct additional Phase II JIEM business process analysis and modeling with representatives from the Sheriffs Department and the Public Defender. Scope was to document exchanges that occur between these offices and the following offices, as appropriate; jail, probation/parole, district attorney, and clerk of courts in same three JIEM Phase I counties. The primary goal of this JIEM Phase II effort was to extend the current Phase I JIEM TO-BE model for improved intracounty electronic information sharing (document exchange) and to ultimately help reduce county prison overcrowding. 59//86477(ppt) 9

21 Summary of Phase II Current Exchange Models Again, the smallest county has the lowest volumes but the most exchanges and documents. The largest county has the highest volumes but the fewest exchanges and documents. County Phase Exchanges Documents Warren Phase I Phase II Lancaster Phase I Phase II Allegheny Phase I Phase II //86477(ppt)

22 Summary of Phase II Current Exchange Models (continued) Phase I conversations:» ARDs.» Bindovers.» Calendars.» Expungements.» Extraditions.» Filings.» Grand juries.» Motions.» Parole violations.» PDQs (Allegheny only).» PSIs.» Releases.» Sentencings.» Summary Appeals.» Transports.» Victims. 59//86477(ppt)

23 Summary of Phase II Current Exchange Models (continued) New for Phase II conversations:» Bench Warrants. Specifically focused on Warrant Returns.» Discovery.» Furloughs.» Notices.» PCRAs. 59//86477(ppt)

24 Summary of Phase II Lancaster County Medium-sized county. Many exchanges from the Court to the Defender. From Exchanges Sheriff Defender Courts Jail Probation Prosecutor To Sheriff Defender To Exchanges Sheriff Defender Courts Jail Probation Prosecutor From Sheriff Defender //86477(ppt) 3

25 Summary of Phase II Lancaster County (continued) Conversation Low Volume Medium High Total Exchanges Appeals ARDs 3 Bench Warrants Calendars 7 7 Discovery 4 5 Extraditions 4 4 Filings Miscellaneous //86477(ppt) 4

26 Summary of Phase II Lancaster County (continued) Conversation Low Volume Medium High Total Exchanges Motions 3 5 Notices 5 5 Parole Violations 3 4 PCRAs 3 4 PSIs Releases 4 6 Sentencings Summary Appeals Transports 5 59//86477(ppt) 5

27 Summary of Phase II Lancaster County (continued) Conversations with multiple high-/medium-volume exchanges: Bench Warrants. Motions. Calendars. 59//86477(ppt) 6

28 Small county. Summary of Phase II Warren County Many exchanges between Prosecutor and Defender. From Exchanges Sheriff Defender Courts Jail Probation Prosecutor To Sheriff Defender To Exchanges Sheriff Defender Courts Jail Probation Prosecutor From Sheriff Defender //86477(ppt) 7

29 Summary of Phase II Warren County (continued) Conversation Low Volume Medium High Total Exchanges Appeals ARDs 3 4 Bench Warrants 6 8 Calendars 5 Discovery 5 6 Expungements Extraditions Filings Furloughs 4 Miscellaneous Motions //86477(ppt) 8

30 Current Exchange Models Warren County (continued) Conversation Low Volume Medium High Total Exchanges Notices 7 9 Parole Violations 3 3 PCRAs 3 3 PSIs Releases Sentencings 3 4 Summary Appeals Transports //86477(ppt) 9

31 Current Exchange Models Warren County (continued) Conversations with multiple high-/medium-volume exchanges: Bench Warrants. Calendars (lists). Motions. Notices. Transports. 59//86477(ppt) 3

32 Large county. Summary of Phase II Allegheny County Minimal communications between Probation and the Sheriff or Defender. From Exchanges Sheriff Defender Courts Jail Probation Prosecutor To Sheriff Defender To Exchanges Sheriff Defender Courts Jail Probation Prosecutor From Sheriff Defender //86477(ppt) 3

33 Current Exchange Models Allegheny County (continued) Conversation Low Volume Medium High Total Exchanges Appeals ARDs Bench Warrants 3 8 Calendars 6 6 Discovery 5 5 Extraditions Filings 5 6 Miscellaneous Motions //86477(ppt) 3

34 Current Exchange Models Allegheny County (continued) Conversation Low Volume Medium High Total Exchanges Notices 5 7 Parole Violations PCRA Releases Sentencing 4 Transports //86477(ppt) 33

35 Summary of Phase II Allegheny County (continued) Conversations with multiple high-/medium-volume exchanges: Bench Warrants. Calendars. Discovery. Filings. Notices. 59//86477(ppt) 34

36 Agenda A. Review of Phase I B. Summary of Phase II C. Comparative Analysis D. Integration Opportunities E. Implementation Priorities F. Conclusions G. Next Steps 59//86477(ppt) 35

37 Comparative Analysis Conversations New conversations:» Warrant Returns.» Discovery.» Transports. Updated conversations:» Expungements.» Extraditions.» Motions.» PSIs. 59//86477(ppt) 36

38 Comparative Analysis Warrant Returns The process for Warrant Returns is very similar in all three counties. The difference lies in the document names. County Document Allegheny Lancaster Warren Return of Service Warrant Clear Return of Service 3X5 Card Affidavit of Service Fees Fee Voucher Process Cost Sheet N/A 59//86477(ppt) 37

39 Comparative Analysis Warrant Returns (continued) Allegheny/Lancaster/Warren Sheriff. Bench Warrant 3. Return of Service Fees Court. Bench Warrant. Bench Warrant 3. Return of Service Jail 3. Return of Service 3. Return of Service DA. Bench Warrant Probation Public Defender. Bench Warrant NOTE: Terms for the document name changes in each county. 59//86477(ppt) 38

40 Comparative Analysis Discovery For discovery, the process and information is very similar in all three counties, but the name of the document changes with the circumstances. For example, if the defense does not want to go through the Courts originally to gather information, then the defense can submit an informal request for discovery straight to the DA. 59//86477(ppt) 39

41 Comparative Analysis Discovery (continued) The difference lies in the document names. The Motion for Omnibus is also known as:» Informal Request for Discovery.» Formal Request for Discovery.» Motion to Compel Discovery. 59//86477(ppt) 4

42 Comparative Analysis Discovery (continued) Allegheny/Lancaster/Warren DA. Omnibus Motion for Additional Information Court. Discovery Public Defender. Omnibus Motion for Additional Information 59//86477(ppt) 4

43 Comparative Analysis Transports Transports can start in different ways from the Courts, the DA, or even the Defense. 59//86477(ppt) 4

44 Comparative Analysis Transports (continued) 59//86477(ppt) 43

45 Comparative Analysis Expungements In Lancaster and Allegheny, expungements are distributed to all agencies by the Court. In Allegheny, Petitions for Expungements on ARD cases are produced by the DA and sent to the Court. In Warren, Probation produces the Petitions for Expungements and routes them through the DA and distributes the signed Order for Expungements. Warren appears to be the only county where the Public Defender expunges records. Lancaster and Allegheny noted that the Public Defender is not requested to expunge records. 59//86477(ppt) 44

46 Comparative Analysis Expungements (continued) Warren Allegheny/Lancaster No Change From Phase I Jail Court Jail. Order for Expungement Court 4. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement 4. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement 3. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement. Order for Expungement. Order for Expungement. Petition for Expungement Probation. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement DA. Motion for Expungement Probation DA 4. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement 5. Joinder 4. Order for Expungement Petition for Expungement Public Defender 59//86477(ppt) 45

47 Comparative Analysis Extraditions In Allegheny and Lancaster, the Waiver and Consent is sent by the DA to the Court. In Warren, the Waiver and Consent is sent by the DA to the Jail. All three counties include the Sheriff in the process, but only in Lancaster does the Sheriff need to complete a request for an extradition packet. This request can be informal ( , phone, etc.) See the example. 59//86477(ppt) 46

48 Comparative Analysis Extraditions (continued) 59//86477(ppt) 47

49 Comparative Analysis Motions In all three counties, the Public Defender is included in Motions and responding to Motions. 59//86477(ppt) 48

50 Comparative Analysis Motions (continued) Allegheny/Lancaster/Warren Usually Motions go through the courts and depending on the situation, the agencies will carbon copy each other.* DA. Motion/Petition 4. Court Order Court 3. Response to Motion*. Motion/Petition* Public Defender. Motion/Petition 4. Court Order 3. Response to Motion 59//86477(ppt) 49

51 Comparative Analysis PSIs In Allegheny, the Court orders the PSI. Probation sends the PSI to the Court which makes it available for the DA and Defender to see. In Warren, Probation sends the PSI to the Jail, Court, DA and Defender. In Lancaster, the Court orders a PSI from Probation and copies the Jail on the PSI Order. Probation receives background information from the DA. Probation sends the PSI to the Court, DA and Defender. 59//86477(ppt) 5

52 Comparative Analysis PSIs (continued) 59//86477(ppt) 5

53 Comparative Analysis PSIs (continued) Lancaster. PSI Order Jail Court Probation. PSI Order 3. PSI 3. PSI. Background Information DA 3. PSI Public Defender 59//86477(ppt) 5

54 59//86477(ppt) 53

55 See you in the AM! 59//86477(ppt) 54