Summit on Effective Responses to Violations of Probation and Parole

Transcription

1 Summit on Effective Responses to Violations of Probation and Parole December 11, 2012 Scott Taylor President, American Probation & Parole Association Director, Multnomah County Department of Community Justice Ginger Martin Deputy Director, Multnomah County Department of Community Justice Jeremiah Stromberg Assistant Director, Oregon Department of Corrections

2 Oregon Before Administrative Sanctions Context: Methamphetamine use increasing Non-compliance and court costs rising DROP Program Pilot: Coos County Jackson County Early Indicators: Decrease in positive UAs Increases in treatment engagement Can we replicate success statewide?

3 Administrative Sanctions in Statute: Enacted 1993 PO has authority to apply an immediate consequence to violators Established a system of structured, intermediate probation violation sanctions Offender waives probation hearing before a judge and consents to sanction DA and court is notified of the sanction imposed, 4 days to object Administrative sanctions were already in place for parole

4 Why Administrative Sanctions? Promote offender change through swift and certain responses to violations Use intermediate sanctions prior to revocation Consistency provided by sanctioning grid Reduce cost to the public: hearings, custody Original goal: statewide policy to reduce technical revocations to prison by 50% Present: needed to manage local criminal justice system resources

5 Supervision Multnomah County Department of Community Justice MODIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS SANCTIONING GRID SYSTEM RESPONSE BEHAVIOR LEVEL I BEHAVIOR LEVEL II BEHAVIOR LEVEL III Fails to report truthfully or notify Probation Officer as directed. Willfully fails to meet payment schedule. NOTE: SYSTEM RESPONSE TO BE USED WHEN OTHER RESPONSES ARE NOT APPLICABLE Prohibited use of alcohol and/or drugs (1 or 2 times) or fails to submit to testing. Misses appointments (1 or 2 times) for treatment programs. Refuses to accept personal responsibilities. Willfully fails to meet restitution or compensatory fine payment schedule. Sanctions Units other than Jail include: Community Service/Work Crew (16 hours = 1 Unit) Residential Treatment Facility (Inpatient, residential, secure) Electronic Monitoring House Arrest Release Programs (Restitution/Work Center, Work Release) Crimes with Crime Seriousness Scale of 3 and less (Sentencing Guidelines Grid). Participates irregularly and fails to successfully complete prescribed treatment programs; takes prescribed psychotropic medications irregularly. Fails to take antabuse. Prohibited use of alcohol and/or drugs or fails to submit to testing (3 or more times). Fails to recognize the authority of the Releasing Authority or Probation Officer and consistently fails to follow the directives of the Releasing Authority and Probation Officer related to conditions of supervision not otherwise listed. Crimes with Crime Seriousness Scale of 4 & above (Sentencing Guidelines Grid) and all Person-to-Person crimes. Possession or use of dangerous/deadly weapons. Prohibited contact with minors/victims/survivors. Refusal to take prescribed psychotropic medications. Refusal to participate in or comply with conditions of prescribed treatment programs. *Refuses to comply with imposed sanctions. **Absconds supervision (see notation below). Level SECTION 1 CRIME SERIOUSNESS/CRIMINAL HISTORY GRID (7A, 8A-8D, 9, 10, 11) HIGH 0-5 UNITS 0-25 UNITS 0-90 UNITS 0-90 UNITS MED LOW Supervision Level HIGH MED LOW Supervision Level HIGH MED LOW Maximum of 3 Units Jail 0-2 UNITS 0-2 UNITS Maximum of 10 Units Jail 0-20 UNITS Maximum of 8 Units Jail 0-15 UNITS Maximum of 5 Units Jail (See Attachment) 0-30 UNITS Maximum of 18 Units Jail 0-25 UNITS Maximum of 15 Units Jail (See Attachment) 0-90 UNITS (See Attachment) 0-90 UNITS Maximum of 30 Units Jail SECTION 2 CRIME SERIOUSNESS/CRIMIL HISTORY GRID(4A-4B, 5A-5F, 6, 7B-7I, 8E-8I) 0-5 UNITS 0-2 UNITS 0-2 UNITS 0-20 UNITS Maximum of 8 Units Jail 0-15 UNIT Maximum of 5 Units Jail 0-10 UNITS 0-25 UNITS Maximum of 15 Units Jail 0-20 UNITS Maximum of 12 Units Jail 0-15 UNITS Maximum of 8 Units Jail 0-90 UNITS (See Attachment) 0-90 UNITS Maximum of 30 Units Jail 0-30 UNITS Maximum of 18 Units Jail SECTION 3 CRIME SERIOUSNESS/CRIMINAL HISTORY GRID (1, 2, 3, 4C- 4I, 5G-5I) and MISDEMEANORS 0-5 UNITS 0-2 UNITS 0-2 UNITS 0-15 UNITS Maximum of 5 Units Jail 0-10 UNITS 0-5 UNITS 0-20 UNITS Maximum of 12 Units Jail 0-15 UNITS Maximum of 8 Units Jail 0-10 UNITS Maximum of 5 Units Jail 0-90 UNITS Maximum of 30 Units Jail 0-30 UNITS Maximum of 15 Units Jail 0-25 UNITS Maximum of 12 Units Jail

6 Summary: How the Grid Works 1. An offender fails to follow a condition of supervision 2. The PO has the authority to impose a swift and sure sanction without going to court or to the Board of Parole 3. The length of the sanction is determined by a grid that takes into account the risk level of the offender, crime of conviction, and the seriousness of the violation 4. Sanctions can include jail time and a range of intermediate sanctions such as residential treatment, work release, house arrest, and community service

7 Ex: DCJ Sanctions Report Oct 2012 Sanction Community Service Total Number 42 Day Reporting Center 141 Electronic Monitoring 60 Jail 376 Revocation 40

8 Guiding Principles Response to violations of supervision must be swift and sure. Responses shall be fair and just. Responses shall consider evidence based practices Response to violations shall be proportional to the seriousness of the behavior while considering risk to public safety. Similar responses for similar types of offenders that commit similar types of violations.

9 Guiding Principles Supervising Parole and Probation officers are most able to determine the best sanction/intervention response to offender behavior. Appropriate use of administrative sanctions/interventions will make supervision more effective, resulting in fewer offenders facing revocation of supervision. A range of sanctions/interventions should be considered, including but not limited to jail. Sanctions/interventions should be progressive in nature, taking into account the seriousness of the violation and threat to public safety.

10 Early Results Swifter Response: Time between violation behavior and response was reduced by 38 days* Increase in Sanctions: Offenders in the structured sanctions program were 23% more likely to have violations detected and to be held accountable* Less Recidivism: Probation offenders subject to structured sanctions had a lower felony convictions rate (7.8% vs. 13.9%) and were less likely to be convicted and sentenced for new offenses than a similar control group* 56% reduction in drug use using repeated short jail stays following positive urine screens (Coos and Jackson Counties) *NCCD study, 1995

11 Alternative Sanctions Study Key Findings of 2003 Literature Review: Alternative sanctions result in no worse recidivism than custody Alternative sanctions compare favorably to custody in terms of cost Neither custody nor community alternatives are better at effecting future compliance

12 2003 Oregon Statewide Report: Effectiveness of Community Sanctions Reconviction Rates Risk Level High/Med Low/Lmtd 5 0 Jail Work Center DRC House Arrest Work Crew

13 2003 Oregon Statewide Report: Length of Stay In Jail and Recidivism % Committing New Felony Within 12 Months Risk Level High Medium Low Limited days days 60+ days

14 Length of Jail Stay and Recidivism Brief periods of incarceration are as effective at curbing new violations as longer stays Length of jail sanction does not effect future compliance or future arrest Longer jail stays either have no effect on recidivism or they result in increasing recidivism

15 Multnomah County Implementation

16 Remember: PPO s are authorized to write checks Bank of Multnomah County Taxpayers Pay to the order of: Jail $5, Five Thousand, One Hundred & no/ Memo Line: For 30 day jail sanction XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Any Multnomah County PPO

17 Questions? Multnomah County Department of Community Justice