Scott County Local Justice System Assessment

Transcription

1 US Department of Justice National Institute of Corrections Jail Division NIC TA-09-J1039 Scott County Local Justice System Assessment Technical Assistance Provided to the Leadership of the Justice Agencies and Units of Government Operating the Justice System Within Scott County, Minnesota By NIC Consultants Robert Cushman Mark Cunniff June 2009

2 NIC Report June

3 NIC Report June 2009 Table of Contents Introduction... 5 Request for Technical Assistance... 5 Coordination of the Visit and Selection of Consultants... 5 Pre Site Visit Preparation... 6 The Consultant s Approach to This NIC Assignment... 7 Results of Preliminary Analyses Explaining Jail Crowding: Analysis of the Source of Jail Crowding Jail Bed Utilization Justice System Trend Analysis The Comparative Analysis Findings and Observations Many good things are happening The challenges of change create problems and opportunities Justice agencies are organizationally isolated from one another A system-wide perspective is needed A Jail capacity utilization dilemma exists Inmates have become a commodity The system has become dependent upon offender fees The stair-step dynamic postponing leaps in expenditures The entire justice system is overloaded Investment in the justice system is being questioned The justice system has lots of data but too little information Public not being sufficiently engaged Commitment and capability to change is uneven Recommended Strategy Adopt a New Business Model Consultant Recommendations Strengthen the Criminal Justice Steering Committee Provide strong staff support to the Criminal Justice Steering Committee Adopt a formal planning process Define the purposes of the jail Complete a sanctions and services matrix Promulgate a corrections strategy Fashion jail to community linkages Examine decision making at the seven key justice system decision points Implement the recommended data analysis plan Establish a jail population analysis capability Engage the public Make use of NIC and other resources Appendixes

4 NIC Report June 2009 A Letter Requesting NIC Technical Assistance A-1 B Introductory Letter B-1 C Interview List & Consultant Schedule C-1 D Explaining Jail Crowding in Scott County. D-1 E Jail Bed Utilization Analysis E-1 F Criminal Justice Trends Analysis F-1 G Comparative Analysis G-1 H Visual Aids Used at the Community Meeting H-1 I Guide to Creating a Corrections Control and Services Matrix I-1 J Data Analysis Plan J-1 4

5 NIC Report June 2009 Introduction This report will summarize technical assistance provided to the criminal justice agencies operating within Scott County, Minnesota. This section of the report describes the request for technical assistance, explains how the consultants were selected, and sets forth the objectives for the technical assistance that were agreed upon. It then summarizes the work that was done by the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) consultants prior to the site visit, and describes the consultant s approach to the assignment. The remainder of this report presents findings, consultant observations and recommendations. Request for Technical Assistance NIC consultants Bob Cushman and Mark Cunniff conducted a Local Justice System Assessment in Scott County, Minnesota May 19 through May 21, The technical assistance was provided in response to a written request from local officials. 1 Workload growth was described as the presenting problem. Coordination of the Visit and Selection of Consultants Fran Zandi, Correctional Program Specialist, National Institute of Corrections, Jails Division, Washington, D.C., coordinated this technical assistance for the NIC. Scott County officials selected consultants Bob Cushman and Mark Cunniff from a list of NIC technical assistance resource persons provided by the NIC. 2 Scott County Justice System Coordinator, Therese McCoy, served as the Scott County coordinator for the site visit. She scheduled the consultant interviews, 3 organized the community meeting 4, gathered and forwarded data and reports and handled the logistics of the visit. 1 The letter requesting technical assistance appears in Appendix A. 2 Brief biographies appear in the Introductory Letter, Appendix B, pages B-11 and B The interview list and consultant schedule appears in Appendix C; Pages C-1 & C-2. 4 The agenda for the Community Meeting appears in Appendix C, page C3, - 5

6 NIC Report June 2009 Pre Site Visit Preparation Following initial phone conversations with Scott County Criminal Justice System Coordinator, Therese McCoy, NIC Consultant Bob Cushman prepared a letter outlining a proposed statement of work to guide the visit. 5 Thereafter, the NIC consultants organized the creation of four analyses. These analyses were transmitted to each person who had requested the technical assistance, in advance of the site visit. The four analyses appear as appendixes to this report. The NIC Consultants prepared two of them. Scott County Justice System Coordinator, Therese McCoy prepared two others, with technical support and advice from the NIC Consultants,. The analyses are titled: Explaining Jail Crowding: An Analysis of Changes in the Number of Bookings/Admissions and Average Length of Inmate Stays in the Scott County Jail System 6. Prepared by NIC Consultant Bob Cushman, using data provided by staff of the Scott County Sheriff s Office. Jail Bed Utilization Analysis: Comparing January and February, 2004 with January and February, prepared by NIC Consultant Mark Cunniff. Criminal Justice Trends: Scott County and Statewide 8 prepared by Therese McCoy. A Comparative Analysis of Crime and Justice Processing Indicators and Measures: Scott County Compared to Five Other Minnesota Counties. 9 Prepared by Therese Mc Coy Correctional Officer Amy Landa, and Sergeant Colleen Szabo provided NIC Consultant Cushman with historical counts of the number of bookings and average daily jail population for each month, starting in January These data were used to prepare an historical analysis of 5 A copy of the introductory letter appears in Appendix B. The letter was sent to Jon Ulrich, Chair, County Board of Commissioners, Gary Shelton, Interim County Administrator, and Sheriff Kevin Studnicka. 6 Explaining Jail Crowding appears as Appendix D. 7 The Jail Bed Utilization Analysis appears as Appendix E. 8 The Criminal Justice Trends Analysis appears as Appendix F. 9 The Comparative Analysis appears as Appendix G. 6

7 NIC Report June 2009 how changes in admissions and changes in the length of inmate stays drive jail occupancy levels (as reported in Explaining Jail Crowding. 10 Scott County IT staff also provided Consultant Mark Cunniff with data about inmates who left the jail during the months of January & February 2004 and these same months in Consultant Cunniff processed and analyzed the data, prior to the site visit, and the result (The Jail Utilization Analysis 11 ) was distributed to local officials prior to the site visit. This made it possible to discuss the jail utilization report data during some of the interviews. 12 Therese McCoy prepared the analysis of Scott County population trends, and crime, adult arrest and other justice processing indicators and measures (as presented in Criminal Justice Trends 13 and in the Comparative Analysis 14 ) Most of this information came from sources available on the Internet. There was extensive exchange of correspondence with state and local justice agencies and the two NIC consultants. The Consultantʼs Approach to This NIC Assignment The main focus of the three-day onsite visit 15 was to help local officials better cope with workload growth of the jail and the justice system operating within Scott County, Minnesota. The assignment required exploration of the relationship between the jail and the operations of the local justice system. Thereafter, the NIC Consultants concentrated on defining a series of inter-related recommendations to better manage jail utilization and improve the administration of justice. During the first day, the NIC consultants toured the jail and conducted interviews. They continued interviewing on the second day. The NIC consultants interviewed staff and key criminal justice policy makers in law 10 This analysis is presented in Appendix D. 11 The Jail Bed Utilization Analysis is presented in Appendix E. 12 The Jail Bed Utilization Analysis is presented in Appendix E. Copies of the visual aids that were presented during the group meeting appear in Appendix H. 13 The Criminal Justice Trends Analysis appears in Appendix F. 14 The Comparative Analysis appears in Appendix G. 15 The visit was limited by time and budget constraints. The consultants were provided with two days prep time, three days on site, and 2 days report writing time. At this level of effort, the Local Justice System Assessment was limited in scope. 7

8 NIC Report June 2009 enforcement, prosecution, defense, the judiciary, and probation officials. Officials of general government were also interviewed. 16 From 9 AM to approximately 3 PM of the third and last day of the on-site visit was devoted to a Community Meeting attended by approximately thirty people. Each person who had been interviewed was invited to the meeting. 17 The Group Meeting was designed to feed back what people in the interviews had been saying to the NIC Consultants (without attribution). It gave the NIC consultants an opportunity to explain the population dynamics that drive justice system and jail crowding and case congestion. It provided a forum for the NIC consultants to describe how other jurisdictions in the country are dealing with increasing jail populations, as well as other problems related to the administration of the justice system. The NIC consultants also presented their observations and recommendations. Preparation of this report represents the final step in the consultant approach to this assignment. The remainder of this report presents findings, consultant observations and recommendations. It summarizes the information and observations that were developed during the site visit, the interviews, the community meeting, and the pre and post site-visit review of written materials. Appendixes to this report contain tools, guides and supporting material. Results of Preliminary Analyses The four analyses that were prepared in advance of the site visit provided the consultants with a great deal of useful diagnostic information to inform the line of inquiry during the site visit. The key findings follow: 16 A list of the people who were interviewed appears in Appendix B. A list of the people who were interviewed appears in Appendix B. A copy of the Community Meeting agenda appears in Appendix C, pages C-3. Copies of the visual aids that were presented during the meeting appear at Appendix H. 8

9 NIC Report June Explaining Jail Crowding: Analysis of the Source of Jail Crowding The number of people in jail is a function of how fast they arrive and how long they stay. Understanding the dynamic interaction between the number of bookings and average length of stay is important. It provides the framework for managing the size and composition of the jail population of the future. The Analysis titled Explaining Jail Crowding: An Analysis of Changes in the Number of Bookings/Admissions and Average Length of Inmate Stays in the Scott County Jail System 18 examines a recent 72-month period in which the jail population ranged from a low of 65 inmates to a high of 157 inmates. It shows how changes in the number of bookings and length of inmate stays produced these fluctuations in the average daily jail population. The analysis demonstrates the technical requirements for managing crowding. 19 It provides a template that can be used to estimate the average length of stay and number of monthly bookings that would be required to postpone opening of the additional 60-person pod. 20 The basic message: The analysis shows that the number of people in jail at any given time is a function of how fast they arrive at the jail (bookings) and how long they stay. It shows how data can be used to determine why and how jail population occupancy levels have changed. It demonstrates how the number of people in jail and the composition of that population can be managed and better controlled. The booking/length of stay analysis provides a template with instructions for extending the data into the future. It will allow Scott County to determine whether changes in jail occupancy levels are being driven by a change in the number of bookings or changes in the length of inmate stays. It will provide information that is needed to help manage jail occupancy levels. 18 The analysis: Explaining Jail Crowding appears as Appendix D. 19 More detailed additional information will be found in two basic publications: Preventing Jail Crowding: A Practical Guide, available in.pdf format at: and Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics, available in.pdf format at: 20 This analysis produced results that seem to be in conflict with the Jail Utilization Analyses. The differences in the results of looking at aggregate numbers provided by the Jail staff and the case counts that were received from the computer system were not resolved during the visit. Most probably, these differences are the result of different counts (bookings vs. releases), what was counted (Comparing all inmates including contracts versus Scott County inmates only, and different time frames. 9

10 NIC Report June Jail Bed Utilization The second analysis, titled Jail Bed Utilization Analysis 21, extends this notion that the number of bookings and average length of inmate stays drive the jail average daily population. This analysis examines the number of bookings and bed day consumption of various categories of inmates. The analysis demonstrates how changes in the number of bookings and lengths of stay of these inmate subcategories have changed the size and composition of the daily jail population. Consultant Cunniff analyzed data concerning every inmate who left the jail in January and February 2004 and January and February The purpose of this analysis was to illustrate a basic, straightforward method for detecting changes in how the jail is being used. 23 The analysit shows the jail is being used differently now than in The analysis shows increases in jail bed space demand came from: The typical inmate is a young white male who is not a resident of Scott County. Non-county residents consume more than half the jail beds. Municipal police departments generate two-thirds of the jail admissions. Three offense groups accounted for most of the increase in jail bed demand: burglary/theft; other property offenses, and drug offenses. While small in number, the number of females and the number of inmates over age 50 has been increasing much faster than other inmate subgroups. Inmates with felony charges consumed more than half the jail bed days. 21 The Jail Bed Utilization Analysis is presented in Appendix E. 22 Some of the results of this two-month comparison run counter to the length of stay findings of the Bookings and Length of Stay Analysis. This is because different approaches were taken in the preparation of the two analyses, especially with respect to the out of county contract inmates. 23 This analysis appears in Appendix F. Note the two month samples at two different points in time does not guarantee representative accuracy of results. The samples are small and the months might not be typical. 10

11 NIC Report June 2009 There were sharp declines in jail bed consumption for inmates with charges involving crimes against the person or failure to comply with court orders. The larger the number of prior admissions, the longer the inmate length of stay. There was a sharp decrease in the number of inmates serving 31 to 90 days. Additional detail appears in Appendix E. The basic message: The Jail Bed Utilization analysis shows that the number of bookings and lengths of stay of a large variety of inmate types have changed between 2004 and The jail is being used differently than before. The jail bed space consumption patterns have changed. The Jail Bed Utilization analysis serves as a template or example of an analysis that needs to be repeated periodically, using at least three months of data from two or more time periods. 3. Justice System Trend Analysis The Criminal Justice Trends Analysis, completed by Therese McCoy analyzed county population, crime, adult arrest and court filing and related trends over the past few years. 24 The purpose of this analysis was to examine the growth of the jail population within a context of changes in these other justice system indicators and measures. The analysis shows: The Scott County population grew substantially in the four-year period The crime prone age group (18-29 years of age) and the least crime prone age group (age 50 and over) grew the fastest. The number of crimes reported per 10,000 residents increased at a slower rate than growth in the county population; The number of adult arrests increased much more than the number of crimes; 24 The Justice Trends Analysis appears in Appendix F. 11

12 NIC Report June 2009 In contrast, the number of District Court case filings had a lower growth rate than adult arrests; The correctional population had the highest growth rate of all the justice system indicators. The growth in the size of the jail population exceeded the growth of the community corrections population. The basic message: These trends do not support the view that the general County population has become more criminogenic. Instead, the increase in the demand for criminal justice services appears to stem from changes in the response of the criminal justice system. It appears that a larger number of people have been placed under correctional supervision, under more stringent behavioral requirements. See Appendix F for more justice trends analysis detail. 4. The Comparative Analysis The comparative analysis was completed to provide a context within which to examine the justice system operating within Scott County. It provides basic justice system diagnostics. This analysis 25 compares Scott County crime and criminal justice indicators with five other Minnesota counties, a composite county made up of the average rates per 10,000 of each of the five comparison counties 26, and statewide averages. It shows: Scott County s overall crime rate was higher than both the fivecounty and the statewide averages. However, it is the higher rate for Part II crimes that produces this higher overall crime rate. The Scott County rate for more serious crimes (Part I offenses) is slightly lower than the five county average rate and substantially lower than the statewide average. Scott County adult arrest rates were above the five-county and statewide comparisons, and substantially above these averages for Part II crimes. 25 The Comparative Analysis of Crime and Justice Processing Indicators and Measures appears as Appendix G. 26 The five comparison counties include the three counties just smaller and just larger in population size. They are: Carver, Olmsted, Sherburne, Stearns, and Wright counties. 12

13 NIC Report June 2009 District Court Filing per 10,000 population was slightly below the five-county average rate, but well below the statewide average. The Scott County Minor Criminal filings statewide can be attributed to the difference in overall rates. The Scott County rate for the number of felony sentences was also below the five-county and statewide averages. Scott County s rate for people under Community Corrections supervision was substantially higher than the five-county average, particularly for misdemeanor offenders. In addition, Scott had more people booked into the jail and they experienced longer periods of incarceration. The basic message: Many of the other Scott County rates are higher than the five-county average rates and the statewide rates. Policies and practices differ from county to county. Each Minnesota County has developed its own local legal culture. Findings and Observations The primary task of our consultancy has been to help local officials restructure and reconceptualize their perceptions of the nature of the problem. This is akin to asking the client to look at the current situation through a new lens. The following frank discussion of consultant findings and observations is intended to lead toward this result. The recommendations that flow from these findings and observations appear in a subsequent section of this report Many good things are happening The nature of the consultant assignment has been to identify problems. However, there are lots of positives. We begin, therefore, with citation of some of these accomplishments. There is new and vigorous leadership, supported by capable and engaged personnel. Collegial relationships prevail within a small town atmosphere, characterized by long-standing personal and family relationships. These are important assets. 27 These observations and recommendations were presented and discussed at the Community Meeting. 13

14 NIC Report June 2009 The people who were interviewed were open, candid, and asked good questions. They seemed genuinely interested in improving the administration of the justice system operating within Scott County. A number of new programs have been initiated and others are being considered. Officials want to discover and emulate best practices. Officials have toured programs and facilities in neighboring counties, looking for better methods. The leadership is ahead of the curve. While there are concerns, there is no sense of crisis. Officials have deliberately taken a time out to allow time to assess and better understand the current situation rather than initiate an endless trial and error approach to program development. The people who were interviewed told the consultants that the time is right to consider and implement reforms. The participants are aware that the action of one justice system agency impacts other agencies. There is concern about this. Officials appear interested in learning how to anticipate, manage and perhaps minimize these surprises. The County is capable of work that is consistent with the state of the art of public administration. For example, The Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update: Making the Vision a Reality is a wellprepared, well-documented and sophisticated document. The Scott County 2008 Comprehensive Plan for Community Corrections provides another example. The median household income in Scott County ranks 2 nd statewide. The poverty rate is the second lowest in the state. These are but two of many measures that indicate the underlying demographic and financial resources of the county. It took courage to invite in a couple of independent NIC consultants to do this work. This is a sign of trust, of open government, and good government. Despite these very positive findings, the consultants also frankly present observations and findings about substantial problem areas, discussed below. 14

15 NIC Report June The challenges of change create problems and opportunities Change has been a driving force in Scott County. There has been a gradual but unrelenting shift from a rural to a more urban environment. Separated from Carver and Hennepin Counties by the Minnesota River, Scott County once had clear geographic and cultural boundaries. But the construction of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge, mentioned often during the interviews, seemed to represent an important marker representing the inevitable transition toward urbanization. The Highway 169 bypass around Shakopee also impacted the old downtown area. There is no doubt that Scott County is now part of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The community is clearly ambivalent about this transition. This is expressed in many ways, including the administration of justice, which operates to reinforce the norms of the community. Times of transition produce ambiguity and uncertainty. Change has been particularly noticeable within the justice system. A new, much larger Jail was brought on line. The old state probation system has given way to a new, locally controlled Community Corrections organization. The local courts are now part of a state administered system. A number of new programs have been initiated. Many long-term city and county employees are retiring. Several key justice system officials are new. 3. Justice agencies are organizationally isolated from one another Like all counties, the justice system operating within Scott County is composed of an array of independently elected and appointed officials of city, county, and state levels of government, operating within independent executive, judicial and legislative branches of government. In an earlier day, when Scott County was smaller and the justice system less complicated, local officials could rely on personal relationships and informal communication to see that things ran smoothly. That tradition no longer works well. More routinized practices and more formal arrangements are necessary. Today, the agencies suffer from insufficient communication, cooperation and coordination across the system. Each agency operates within its own organizational silo. 15

16 NIC Report June 2009 The focus is on specific cases, not an assessment of decision making at the seven key justice system decision points where these agencies come together to do their work. 28 Several of the consultant recommendations are aimed at overcoming these barriers to communication, cooperation and coordination. Tim Walsh described it best: Small systems can rely upon informal contacts and personal relationships to operate. As Counties become larger and more complex, it becomes increasingly difficult for these systems to work together on an informal basis because there are simply too many people, too much information, work, and complexity in the system. Bigger systems also rely upon good professional relationships but also need expertly designed justice processes, and more formal planning and decision-making structures to smoothly operate. Scott County has a series of committees with overlapping membership and responsibilities. This is in the arrangement of a patchwork quilt. No formal planning process is in place to knit these separate efforts together. The Community Corrections Advisory Board includes many of the key people who administer the justice system that operates within Scott County, but their focus is exclusive to Community Corrections. The Court Services Committee is made up primarily of court-related mid-level managers. The Criminal Justice Work Group includes key Justice System members but typically is often comprised of mid-level managers, supervisors and staff representing court administration issues. The quarterly meeting between County Administration and the 1st District Judicial system leaders is primarily informational and relational. These committees do good work but they are primarily focused on operational planning, not program or policy level planning; and they tend to limit their activities to serving segments of the justice system. Scott County has established a Justice System Steering Committee on a trial basis. It has also provided staff to the committee; however, it What the county has accomplished is the basis for a Criminal Justice Planning Committee, which the county will find invaluable not only to assisting in the planning and construction of a new facility, but the equally important effort of population control. - August 2000 NIC report 1 28 The seven key justice system decision points were discussed at the Community Meeting. Illustrations appear in Appendix H, pages H-5 through H-9, beginning at H-5, graphic #

17 NIC Report June 2009 has been difficult to develop commitment to the process. This seems to be because the potential value of the committee is not well understood, the concept is foreign to the participants, and they do not have a shared vision of what is possible. This is very new territory for them. The existing committee membership is too limited. It is county-centric. Representatives of other city, county and state justice agencies need to be added. 4. A system-wide perspective is needed. The impact of decisions being made in one agency often affect many other agencies but the external impact of these decisions are often overlooked. Many of the solutions to problems raised by the people who were interviewed require involvement of two or more independent and very separate agencies and/or levels of government. The organizational mechanisms needed to bring these separate organizations together to work collaboratively do not exist. Even line workers who discover systemic problems often toil on because they have no problem-solving group to turn to for help. At present, officials are forced to make decisions without empirical information that would suggest alternative courses of action, or to evaluate the results of their decisions. This leads to indecision/inaction, doubt and confusion about the true nature of the problems they are trying to address. It generates unnecessary The Scott County criminal justice system is growing and like most other counties around the nation it has become too sophisticated to rely solely on informal communication and planning processes. Currently the agencies use a series of bilateral interactions for each problem that needs to be resolved. August 2000 NIC report, p. 132 friction between and among decision makers. Officials rely too heavily on anecdotal information, or an unusual case or event that will serve to justify and propel action. The consultants believe that the extent to which staff are consumed with dealing with cases that fall through the cracks, with exceptions, with firefighting, etc. is a direct indication of weaknesses in policy, program and operational planning processes. This suggests that improved planning and coordination could reduce the need to do this fire-fighting. At the Community Meeting the consultants presented an 11-step General Planning process or planning framework that distinguished policy 17

18 NIC Report June 2009 planning from program planning and operational planning. 29 This leads to several interconnected recommendations, discussed later in this report. 5. A Jail capacity utilization dilemma exists Scott County is wrestling with a jail population capacity dilemma. Ironically, this is the same dilemma faced by a jurisdiction with a crowded jail. In the Scott County case, however, it revolves around the decision to bring the last available 60-bed inmate-housing unit on line. On one side are proponents who want the county to open the last available 60-bed housing unit. The supporters for this option cite a growing average daily inmate population. On occasion, they must place an inmate in a housing area that violates the inmate classification system. On the other side are proponents who believe the number of inmates in jail should be managed more aggressively. They believe more options should be put in place to either reduce admissions or reduce the length of inmate stays. They see an abundance of minimum-security male inmates, especially in pod B, who might be safely supervised in a non-custodial setting. Moving some of these inmates to supervision in the community would postpone the need to open the new 60-bed unit. They contrast the current operation with a former time, before the new jail was built, when all available options were being used. They note that opening the new 60- bed inmate housing area will require about one million dollars per year. If some of the contract inmates were simply returned to their home jurisdiction, the number of people in the jail could easily be managed without opening the new 60-bed unit. But both sides seem reluctant to reduce the number of contract inmates. This is because the County has become dependent upon the revenue to finance jail operations. The actual revenue from contract beds has consistently fallen below projections, a condition which raises doubts about meeting the revenue targets from this source. In practical terms, the solution that would seem to best satisfy both interest groups would be to reduce the admissions and lengths of stay of local Scott inmates while retaining and even increasing the number of contract inmates to maximize revenue. The problem is that this trajectory may conflict with citizens and officials who seek to utilize the jail to maximize public safety within Scott County. This observation reinforces the need to better define the purposes of the jail, discussed elsewhere in this report. 29 The 11-step planning process is illustrate in Appendix H, pages H- 9 through H

19 NIC Report June 2009 The same dynamics that have been described here will be played out again when the new sixty-bed unit is full, and thereafter, as the additional pods are built out. Eventually, once the new sixty-bed unit has been filled, there will come a tipping point where the need to house local inmates will begin to replace beds occupied by contract inmates. This will gradually reduce the revenue being generated by these inmates. It is in the interest of everyone to live within the bed space resource and make it last at least until The only way to do this is to manage the size and character of the jail population so each new pod is only brought on-line when it is needed. 6. Inmates have become a commodity. The number of jail inmates is declining in most counties through out the state. The per diem reimbursements for housing out of county inmates have declined. A number of other jurisdictions have built excess capacity and there is fierce competition for contract inmates. 7. The system has become dependent upon offender fees. This is because it craves additional resources. It also reflects a philosophy that offenders should pay for services. If carried to an extreme, this approach can have unintended consequences. For example, a few of the people who were interviewed noted that the financial requirements being placed on many offenders sets them up for failure to comply with an aggregate of payments: court fees, fines, restitution, probation fees, fees for a variety of treatment programs, and, perhaps, child support and other obligations. 8. The stair-step dynamic postponing leaps in expenditures Justice expenditures rarely increase at a steady pace. Instead, they go up in stair- steps as a new pod of the jail is opened, as a new court room is added, as a new probation officer is added, etc. Another way of looking at crowding is that it is an attempt to postpone a leap up a stair- step to a new, higher level of expenditure. This can be illustrated as follows: 19

20 NIC Report June 2009 The least expensive daily cost per inmate is that point just before the jail is expanded (Point A on the diagram). The daily cost per inmate day is most expensive on the day after the expansion is opened (Point B on the diagram.) This is one reason that jails are crowded. It also explains why caseloads are allowed to balloon before adding another court room, probation officer, etc. The longer the jump up the stair-case is postponed, the bigger the increase in per inmate cost or per case cost will be. Given the current trajectory of workload growth, Scott County is positioned for a leap up the total justice expenditure staircase. This will take the form of opening up the remaining 60-bed housing unit, adding courtrooms, and adding capacity to a variety of county-funded justice agencies headed by officials who told the NIC consultants that they are operating at capacity. Unfortunately, these workload pressures are taking place at a time when the money needed to finance them will probably not be available. If unattended, this will result in system breakdowns, degradation of service, and conflict between and among agencies. 9. The entire justice system is overloaded Despite the infusion of considerable resources, justice agencies report they are straining to keep up with a rising tide of cases and people flowing 20

21 NIC Report June 2009 through the seven key justice system decision points from arrest to final disposition. The data reflects that this is so. 30 On many measures, the number of cases per 10,000 population in Scott County is substantially above the average of five comparison counties and statewide averages. 31 The public and private non-profit agencies that provide services to offenders in jail and Community Corrections also report they are operating at or beyond their capacities. They have an insufficient number of service slots to meet the workload demand posed by offenders. Thus, justice and allied agencies continue to indicate they need more resources. 10. Investment in the justice system is being questioned Some of the people who were interviewed expressed the view that justice agencies are receiving a very large share of resources, while non-justice agencies, especially service agencies, are receiving a smaller portion of the resource pie. They believe this is unfair and misguided. They point to the new jail, the justice center, the countywide radio system, and increases to the annual budgets of certain justice agencies. The exception is the Public Defender, which everyone seems to agree is the most under-funded of all justice agencies. The people who were interviewed provided many examples of how this impacted their operations. This is best expressed by the phrase: We spend a lot of time waiting. These comments suggest a potential resource balance problem exists, both within the justice system, and at the City, County and State levels of government. The mechanisms that would be required to bring the system into balance, and the information that would be needed to guide such an effort are not in place. 11. The justice system has lots of data but too little information. Data and information are generally not used to drive policy formulation and the resulting decision-making and assessment/evaluations that would result from a system-wide policy driven management process. As a result, there appears to be little demand for analyses. However, the staff has demonstrated they do have an ability to analyze data The Analyses in Appendix F and G summarize this growth in workload. 31 This is demonstrated in the Comparative Analysis. See Appendix G 32 For example, Therese McCoy produced the Trend Analysis (Appendix F) and the Comparative Analysis (Appendix G). We met additional County-level staff that seemed equipped to do these kinds of analyses. 21

22 NIC Report June 2009 Action should be based on knowledge. Personnel who are responsible for jail operations do not have the tools needed to show how changes in the number of bookings and/or lengths of inmate stays are driving the jail population higher (or lower). And, until now, the staff at the jail has not had the conceptual framework they need to perform these analyses. As a result, utilization of the Jail bed space resource is not well understood by justice system officials, general officials of county and city governments, or the public. There is a lot of data about individual inmates, but difficulty turning that data into useful information about how the facility is being used, and how its use has changed over time. There is too little information about how Scott County compares with other counties of similar size and circumstance, or with statewide averages. Inmate Information System: A comprehensive inmate information system is needed to assist the county in determining not only who is in the jail, but why. The county has already made some important steps to achieving this goal, but current practices should be improved upon. Expansion of this area could provide valuable input into why so many more people charged with misdemeanors are in such secure facilities. Further development in this area could significantly contribute to more effective population control. August 2000 NIC report These weaknesses exist at several levels of government: at the agency level, the City and County level, and particularly at the comprehensive level represented by the justice system operating within Scott County. The limited ability to analyze and define problems at the jail also extends to the rest of the justice system. There are distinct weaknesses in ability to collect, analyze, and communicate information about the processing of cases and people through the seven key justice system points that were discussed during the group meeting. 33 Few staff are dedicated to this function. There is a need for further staff development of the few existing analysts. The NIC consultants provided several examples of the kind of analysis that these analysts will need to be able to produce. 33 These decision points are illustrated in Appendix H, pages H-5 through H-9. 22

23 NIC Report June Public not being sufficiently engaged Earlier, we mentioned that there isn t a thorough understanding of who is in the jail, how long they stay, and the bed space consumption of various prisoner types. Without this understanding there is no way to inform and engage the public in a process in which they can express their preferences for the use of jail bed space. There are similar impediments to engaging the public though out the local justice system. The community meeting revealed there are many myths and misunderstandings of how the justice system operates, and a certain level of distrust at not being able to obtain answers to some pretty basic questions 13. Commitment and capability to change is uneven The interviews revealed some strong, committed leadership interspersed with others who have a much lower sense of urgency, commitment, optimism or enthusiasm. The changes that will be necessary will require their participation. This raises questions about whether the overall capability exists to execute the changes that are needed. The question is: Can management rise to the occasion? Does it have the capability and, if not, how can organizational and individual competencies be strengthened so these challenges can be met successfully. Recommended Strategy Adopt a New Business Model The NIC consultants are recommending adoption of a new business model. The current predominant strategy is to attempt to outrun the workload by continually adding new resources. The new, proposed strategy involves managing the size and composition of the workload of the justice system within resource limits. This business model stresses development of the planning, management and information-handling infrastructure, before adding more clerks, probation officers, jail beds, and judges. Invest first in improving the planning, management and information handling infrastructure. 23

24 NIC Report June 2009 It should be clear from the following recommendations that the consultants are recommending the Scott County justice system invest the next marginal dollar in improving the planning, management and information-handling infrastructure of the justice system as opposed to attempting to outrun the workload by hiring more correctional officers, probation officers, judges, adding jail beds, etc. We expect this recommendation to be initially resisted by officials who feel they are barely keeping their heads above water, but the old strategy of trying to outrun the workload by adding resources is simply not going to work. A new business model is being suggested. It will require a dramatic change in approach and investment. Successfully implementing these recommendations will improve the administration of the entire justice system operating within Scott County. The reaction of certain officials during the interviews and at the Community Meeting demonstrated that managerial and political challenges exist that may be difficult to overcome. For example, implementation of the approach that is being recommended means making choices and setting priorities. This is going to be difficult. This will require collaboration between and among agencies. The mechanisms needed to come to these agreements do not yet exist. Also, officials are not yet experienced at this priority-setting decision making process. Consultant Recommendations 1. Strengthen the Criminal Justice Steering Committee Strengthen the fledgling Criminal Justice Steering Committee. This is an organizational development task. An independent, outside facilitator may be required to help the Steering Committee move to a new level of commitment and effectiveness. Emphasize policy-level planning. Membership should be expanded to include the key justice system policy makers, including city, county, and state officials, and the three branches of government. The justice system operating within Scott County consists of many different justice agencies, at differing levels of government (city, county, state) and within the three branches of government: executive, judicial, legislative. Controlling the size and character of the workload can only be 24

25 NIC Report June 2009 accomplished through increased communication, cooperation and coordination. It requires that a system perspective be developed to knit together the separate information system and organizational silos that characterize the current approach. The new perspective must also preserve the constitutional independence and prerogatives of all the parties involved. While it may not be appropriate here to spell out the details of the operation of a Criminal Justice Steering Committee, the general scope of what needs to be done can easily be described. A Guide has been developed that will explain how these justice system-wide coordination groups are usually organized and function. 34 Local leadership should obtain free copies of this guide, study it, and tailor the advice to strengthen the local coordination group. Other jurisdictions in the US have developed successful Criminal Justice Coordinating Committees (CJCCs). It might help to visit with the staff and CJCC leadership in these counties. Stearns County, MN has an experienced and excellent CJCC. If a visit cannot be arranged, we suggest telephone conversations with your counter-parts there. Ask them how their CJCC works. Ask them how the CJCC benefits them and their agencies. The purpose of the CJCC should be to improve system-wide communication, cooperation and coordination. The group should serve as a kind of board of directors for the system of justice operating within Scott County, serve as a forum in which to examine system policies and practices, identify system problems, consider and select alternative courses of action, and evaluate justice processes. The benefits of a Criminal Justice Steering Committee include: Improved analysis of problems. Elected officials and justice administrators need timely and meaningful information from all parts of the system in order to continuously improve their decisionmaking. 34 See: Guidelines for Developing a Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee, NIC publication number , available from the National Institute of Corrections Information Center, or send request to asknicic@nicic.org. The publication is free. An electronic download PDF version of the publication is also available at: 25

26 NIC Report June 2009 Improved communication, cooperation, and coordination. A planning committee provides an effective forum for justice leaders to work and plan together. Clear goals, objectives, and priorities. Justice leaders can articulate together their common purposes, goals, and how they want to operate as a system. More effective allocation of resources. Justice leaders can also use the committee to prioritize where to focus limited resources. Improved programs and services. Better sharing of information on crime trends, recidivism rates, and the safety needs of the public will be the basis for developing strategies to address these issues. Improved efficiency and effectiveness. Justice leaders will identify gaps in justice processes, gaps in services, and desired outcomes and plan how to improve the effective design and the efficient administration of the system. 2. Provide strong staff support to the Criminal Justice Steering Committee The NIC consultants strongly recommend that the Criminal Justice Steering Committee be provided adequate, independent staff support. It will not function well without skilled analytical/planner/facilitator support. 35 This person should not be viewed as a Director ; instead he or she should occupy the role of a facilitator/staffer, perceived as working for the CJCC, not one of the participating agencies or units of government. 3. Adopt a formal planning process A formal planning process will bring needed discipline to the policy, program and operational planning process. It should foster a systems perspective, consider system-wide impacts of new programs and test assumptions before new programs are initiated. These needs were discussed during the group meeting. 36 Planning should be a continuous management process and include feedback loops that will permit evaluation and refinement of justice processes. 35 Staff recruitment, qualifications and typical duties are briefly described at pages of Guidelines for Developing a Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee. 36 Visual aids used to illustrate policy; program and operational planning appear in Appendix H, pages H-9 and H-10 and at pages 9-15 of Guidelines for Developing a Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee. 26

27 NIC Report June Define the purposes of the jail Scott County has not defined the jail as a limited purpose facility. Almost anyone can be admitted. The jail is used to house a wide range of inmate types. A very wide variety of federal, immigration, out of state, state, and local inmates reside there. It is a mixture of three distinct groups: people we are afraid of, people we are upset with and people we do not know what to do with. More clearly defining the purpose of the jail is a first step in managing the flow into the jail and the length of stay. This will help define the size and composition of the jail population. Several related recommendations will make it easier to tackle the difficult job of redefining the purpose(s) of the jail. Better information about how the jail is currently being used will help officials define the gap between existing utilization and more desirable, preferred use of the bed space. Construction of the Sanctions and Services Matrix will make it easier for officials to determine the proper place of the jail sanction in context with other sanctions and services. 37 Examination of decision making at the seven key justice system decision points will also help determine more appropriate and realistic utilization of jail beds. Initial attempts to define the purposes of the jail will give way to periodic revisiting of this question as better data becomes available to support subsequent iterations of the policy planning process. Thus, as time passes, the answer(s) to this question should become clearer, more restricted, more refined. 5. Complete a sanctions and services matrix Preparation of a sanctions and services matrix is another piece of staff work that needs to be initiated. The purpose of the sanctions and services matrix is to provide a big-picture view of all of the people under supervision on a given day. The exercise will also show the capacity of each sanction and program, and the daily cost of each program and sanction. These three spreadsheets provide a graphic depiction of the existing system. They form the basis for identifying gaps in services and suggest where additional expenditures might make the most sense Instructions for completing a Sanctions and Services Matrix appear in Appendix I. 38 A Guide for preparing the matrix appear in Appendix I 27

28 NIC Report June 2009 The concept was discussed at the community meeting. An example matrix was presented and discussed. A guide for preparing a Sanctions and Services Matrix appears in Appendix I. 6. Promulgate a corrections strategy Completion of the Corrections Sanctions and Services Matrix and discussion of the purposes of the jail should gradually produce the dialogue that is needed to better define the Scott County corrections strategy, including custodial, residential, probation and other field based sanctions, services and options. In practice, this corrections strategy will be expressed by the decisions that are made to place people at various places on a continuum of sanctions and to assign them to a wide variety of well thought out correctional programs and services. These decisions will also be improved through the increased use of assessment and classification tools, as they are developed in Scott County. 7. Fashion jail to community linkages What should be the organizational and functional relationship between organizations that provide Jail custodial services and organizations that provide non-custodial sanctions and services within the community? How should these be tied together? Development of the Sanctions and Services Matrix, and promulgation of a corrections strategy will necessarily require officials to think through how custodial and non-custodial correctional options and services should be knitted together. This will also provide the framework for planning and executing plans to transition each Scott County inmate who is released from the jail or re-enters the jail setting. 8. Examine decision making at the seven key justice system decision points. Examining decision making at the seven key justice system decision points will need to be preceded by development of increased organizational and individual analytic capabilities. This will require developing the personnel and systems needed to convert existing data into information that can better support policy, program and operational decision making. 39 These resources should be focused on illuminating, mirroring back, and 39 Policy, Program and Operational planning were discussed at the group meeting. These are the three levels of planning that are represented on the eleven-step General Planning Process diagram. See Appendix H. Page H-9 (#27 & 28). The concept is also summarized at pp of Guidelines for Developing a Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee. 28

29 NIC Report June 2009 understanding decision making at the seven key justice system decision points. 40 Examples of the kinds of analyses that need to be produced are contained in Appendixes D to G of this report. A Data Analysis Plan has also been included as appendix J to this report. 41 It will serve as a guide. 9. Implement the recommended data analysis plan Consultant Cunniff has prepared a Data Analysis Plan that will serve as a suggested blueprint to the main analytic tasks that Scott County needs to perform to better understand the dynamics behind the demand for jail beds and other justice system services. 42 This plan appears as Appendix J. The major task is to compute the system rates for the major decision points in the administration of justice. System rates can be obtained for six of the seven decision points in Scott County: booking into the jail; release from the jail; charging the defendant; adjudicating the charges; sentencing convicted offenders; and modifying sentences. 43 This can be accomplished by creating a series of data extracts based on persons leaving the six decision points. Tracking cases as they flow through the justice system would be more complete, but time consuming and expensive to do. Information drawn from a series of extracts provides a valid illustration of case flow and can be accomplished relatively quickly and efficiently. The other task is to analyze the changes that have occurred in the jail population. 44 Templates for doing this have been prepared and appear in Appendix D, E and J. Both analytic tasks should have data from two different time frames that are at least five years apart. Data from one time period is useful for understanding how the system is operating at that time. However, the comparison of findings from two different time frames brings into focus how the justice system and the jail population may have changed over time. A full year's reference period would provide a robust data resource, 40 The seven key justice system decision points were presented and discussed at the group meeting. See Appendix H, pages H-5 through H- 9. An outline of how to go about this work is presented in the Data Analysis Plan for Scott County. See Appendix J. 41 The recommended Data Analysis Plan appears in Appendix J. 42 The recommended Data Analysis Plan appears in Appendix J. 43 The police officers decision to make an arrest is very difficult to measure as there are no records that would indicate when an officer might have had cause to stop some one, but declined to do so. Once an arrest is made, however, a record trail is established that permits the calculation of system rates for the remaining six major decision points. 44 The person undertaking these analytic tasks should consult the NIC publication, Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics, for additional discussion of analytic issues involving these two tasks. 29

30 NIC Report June 2009 but lesser time frames can be used (no less than three months) if data collection costs become an issue. 10. Establish a jail population analysis capability Scott County should create and implement a jail population analysis system (JPAS) 45 to document and explain how changes in the number of bookings and lengths of stay of subpopulations of prisoners combine to determine the number of people in jail. No new data is required. The data needed by such a system is already collected and in the Jail information system. It simply needs to be put into a proper form, analyzed and routinely reported out. Understanding these population dynamics is essential to understanding why the number of people in jail is increasing (or falling). These changes in admission rates and length of stays are primarily the result of changes in policy and practice by the main users of the jail. These data need to be placed in front of these key users if they are to truly understand how jail space is currently being used, and the impact they are having on the number and characteristics of people in jail. 46 Managing the size of the jail system population will depend upon achieving agreements about changes in justice system policies. This is because changes in the size of the jail population are primarily the result of changes in the policies and decision-making responses of justice system officials at the seven key justice system decision points discussed through out this report. The JPAS will help Scott County justice system officials work together to determine and manage the size and character of the justice system workload, and diminish the extent to which the workload itself manages the system. The basic concepts and a description of what a jail population analysis system should look like can be found in the NIC publication: Preventing Jail 45 A very basic jail population analysis system is described in a short 12-page publication available free from the National Institute of Corrections. See: Preventing Jail Crowding: A Practical Guide, NIC publication number , available from the National Institute of Corrections Information Center, or send an request for the publication to asknicic@nicic.org. The publication is free. An electronic download PDF version of the publication is also available at 46 During the group meeting a water barrel analogy was used to present the basic jail population dynamics and illustrate how a jail population analysis system would operate. See Appendix H, page H-3. See, also, Appendix D. 30

31 NIC Report June 2009 Crowding: A Practical Guide. 47 See also, Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics 48, which provides a framework for analysis and planning to support effective criminal justice system oversight. Appendix D contains a spreadsheet template that sorts out how changes in the number of admissions and/or length of stay change the number of people in the Scott County jail. 49 This approach can be utilized until a more sophisticated, computer-based jail population analysis can be created in Scott County. 11. Engage the public The people who feel the jail and court limitations most acutely are the people who work at the jail and judicial officers and their staff support. The sense of crisis diminishes rapidly as one goes beyond these groups. The general public, however, is not yet sufficiently engaged. They need to know that there is a problem and that officials need their help, and resources, to better manage the current challenges to public safety and the integrity of the law. The public cannot be counted on to support new jail space or new court space until they know there is a substantial problem and that any and all perceived excesses have been squeezed out of the current jail/court/justice system. Engaging the public is a collective responsibility but rests primarily with the Criminal Justice Steering Committee. The NIC consultants note that successfully engaging the public will require justice system officials to overcome at least two major impediments: The friction between justice conservatism (apply sanctions) and fiscal conservatism (reduce expenditures) presents a noticeable 47 See Preventing Jail Crowding: A Practical Guide, NIC publication number , available from the National Institute of Corrections Information Center, or send an request for the publication to asknicic@nicic.org. The publication is free. An electronic download PDF version of the publication is also available at 48 Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics, January 2002, 60 pp. also available from the NIC. Accession no. NIC Sections discuss how to identify factors behind jail crowding, key questions about bed space needs, trends underlying jail population growth, forecasting, and analytic processes and roles. 60 pp. 49 Instructions for completing the template appear at the end of Appendix D. 31

32 NIC Report June 2009 barrier to taking action in Scott County. The CJCC must find ways to negotiate and manage this potential stalemate. The CJCC must convince the public(s) that jail is but one sanction in a continuum of sanctions, ranging from secure custody to low level supervision in the community, and that these are ALL legitimate sanctioning options, and are being applied properly Make use of NIC and other resources The National Institute of Corrections should be called upon to provide additional help in Scott County: The Pretrial Justice Institute in Washington D.C. can provide NIC sponsored technical assistance to assess and help develop pretrial programs. 51 Implementing an objective point scale to guide personal recognizance bond decisions might increase the number of pretrial releases and also improve the ability of these releases to appear in court. The National Center for State Courts provides high quality technical assistance that can help local courts examine business practices. There may be local colleges or universities who could provide professors and/or masters level students to help with some of the analytical tasks that have been recommended in this report. The NIC can also provide technical assistance to help implement case screening at the seven key justice system decision points and provide tools and programs that will improve offender risk management. The NIC Community Corrections Division has a number of programs to provide technical assistance and training to probation and community corrections staff. These are explained in the NIC annual plan. 52 The NIC maintains a large library of practical and useful publications. Many have been cited elsewhere in this publication. 50 The often heard phrase alternatives to jail suggests that jail is the preferred alternative and other sanctions represent getting off, or less than desirable, or a poor substitute for jail time. 51 Contact the Pretrial Justice Institute at: or at 52 The NIC 2008 Service Plan can be found at: 32

33 NIC Report June 2009 You can browse the NIC library at: Appendixes A Letter Requesting NIC Technical Assistance A-1 B Introductory Letter B-1 C Interview List & Consultant Schedule C-1 D Explaining Jail Crowding in Scott County. D-1 E Jail Bed Utilization Analysis E-1 F Criminal Justice Trends Analysis F-1 G Comparative Analysis G-1 H Visual Aids Used at the Community Meeting H-1 I Guide to Creating a Corrections Control and Services Matrix I-1 J Data Analysis Plan J-1 33

34 34

35 <<A - 1>>

36 <<A - 2>>

37 Appendix B Introductory Letter << B -1>>

38 << B -2>>

39 Improving The Administration of Justice Bob Cushman 602 Greenwich Lane Foster City, CA Phone: Fax: BoborSandy@AOL.com March To: Kevin Studnicka, Sheriff Jon Ulrich, Chair, County Board of Commissioners Gary Shelton, Interim County Administrator From: Robert C. Cushman, NIC Consultant Subject: NIC Sponsored Technical Assistance to the Scott County Board of County Commissioners, Sheriff and Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee. This will follow-up my phone conversations with Therese McCoy, your Scott County Justice System Coordinator, concerning the Local Justice System Assessment that the County Board and the Sheriff have requested from the National Institute of Corrections (NIC). The purposes of this letter are to handle some basic logistics, summarize our view of what a Local Justice System Assessment involves, help get you started with preparations for our visit, and provide you with some background information about me and my co-consultant, Mark Cunniff. NIC has tasked Mark and me to visit Scott County to assist you. We are prepared to be on-site on Tues., Wed. and Thurs. May 19, 20 and 21. We will arrange our travel so that we will be in Shakopee by Monday evening. We can start out as early on Tuesday as you wish. We would like to meet with all of you first, just to go over any last minute developments, and get us oriented. You may want others involved; however, it should be a small group and a short meeting. We could do this at a breakfast meeting, or it could be our first meeting on Tuesday. We should tour the jail early during our visit in order to have a context for the information we will be gathering during the various interviews. << B -3>>

40 Usually, a Local Justice System Assessment devotes the rest of the day Tuesday and Wednesday to conducting interviews. The third day of the visit, Thursday, is normally reserved for an all day community meeting. We would like to finish up by 5:00 PM on Thursday. The Local Justice System Assessment Program Typically, the events that trigger the request for technical assistance from the NIC involve jail crowding, and planning for better utilization of institutional bed space, or preliminary planning for a new institution. The system-wide assessment ensures that jurisdictions explore a range of options as part of their decision-making. Generally, the on-site consultant activities involve: 1. An analysis of the place the jail occupies as part of the local justice system; that is, its role as part of a continuum of pre-trial and postconviction options and sanctions; 2. A review of the overall functioning of the criminal justice system, including its planning and coordination capacity. This is done through interviews with key members of the local criminal justice system and citizens to capture their perceptions of major justice system problems and challenges; 3. A community meeting including the key justice system decision makers who have been interviewed during the first two days of the on-site visit, officials of general government, service providers and others to discuss our preliminary findings, explore and obtain additional advice concerning options, provide information, and initiate action planning. Our Approach Mark and I have conducted a number of Local Justice System Assessments, and it is our view that a well-planned and administered jail is, in part, a function of the overall management and coordination of the local justice system. The main focus of our three-day on-site work will be to analyze the relationship of the jail to the local justice system and to guide the local leadership toward long-term solutions to jail utilization and an overall improved criminal justice response to the local crime problem Our interviews and data collection will provide a basis for the assessment. This should result in dialogue with local officials to define and review the << B -4>>

41 choices and challenges that face the community. We will make recommendations based on our findings and the values that are expressed in the interviews and community meeting. This is all designed to provide local decision makers with information to help you determine the appropriateness of your range of sanctions, develop short and long term plans, based on current system capacities, and determine how many secure and non-secure confinement beds and community based placements are required to support your system, now and in the future. We want to help you identify and over come any weaknesses in your current planning processes, and help you gain more confidence in the decisions you are making. As a follow-up to the on-site visit, we will provide a written report containing options and recommendations for improvement, if appropriate, in any of the above areas, and present key findings. We will also summarize information gathered during the interviews and the community meeting. You will receive this report within two weeks of our visit. Clearly, because of the pace of activities when we are there, it will help to have information that we can read before our visit. We will need you to send us copies of any recent annual reports or special studies that will help us better understand the local justice system and the jail. In the meantime, Mark and I will be working with Therese McCoy and, through her, will involve other staff there to secure information we will need in advance of our visit. Our intention is to have four analyses prepared prior to our visit: A historical picture of the extent to which changes in admissions and changes in average length of jail stays are driving jail occupancy levels A Booking and Length of Stay Analysis A brief summary of county growth, crime, arrest and other justice system trends A Justice System Trends Analysis A Comparative Analysis of Crime and Justice System Indicators A Comparative Analysis A description of how the jail has been used in the past compared to how it is being used now - A Jail Utilization Analysis << B -5>>

42 Therese McCoy is coordinating development of these analyses. Your staff is completing the first three, with Mark and I serving as technical advisors and helpers. Mark Cunniff will prepare the Jail Utilization Analysis, but that report is dependent upon obtaining data from your IT department, something Therese McCoy is also coordinating. Other Logistics I have enclosed a generic short list of the kind of people we think we will need to interview and I have included an example of an agenda for the community meeting. We will need to work together to tailor both of these to meet the unique requirements in Scott County. Usually, the interviews can be scheduled about 45 minutes apart. While there may be exceptions, it will probably be better if most of the interviews are held at a convenient, neutral, central location. Please leave our evenings free, as we will need this time to debrief and prepare for the Community Meeting. The community meeting, scheduled for Thursday, usually involves all of the people who have been interviewed, plus other interested officials, service providers and citizens. It is essentially a large public meeting. We will provide the participants with a summary of the results of the four analyses that were completed prior to the visit, and discuss the results of our interviews, without attribution as to the specific sources of information. We will sketch out our observations and recommendations during the meeting. We also see the community meeting as a time to do some basic information sharing, and a time for the participants to share their preferences about how justice system and jail issues should be approached. We will be using visual aids at the community meeting, so the room location should be suited to projection on a wall or screen. We will need an overhead projector (for transparencies), a power point set up (computer, projector and remote clicker ) and an easel with newsprint, masking tape, and marking pens. We may also need a hands free microphone if the acoustics of the meeting room are poor. << B -6>>

43 Three reports available from the NIC web site ( and from the NIC Information Center ( ) provide useful background. The reports are: Guidelines for Developing a Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee, by Robert Cushman (January, 2002, NIC accession number ); Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics, by Mark Cunniff (January, 2002, NIC accession number ); and, Preventing Jail Crowding: A Practical Guide, by Robert Cushman, (NIC publication number ) We think it will help the process if you obtain these reports and disseminate them to your leading criminal justice officials before our arrival. I have enclosed copies of biographical information about Mark and me. This should give you an idea of our backgrounds and work experience in the justice system. Finally, we make it a habit to offer to sit down with a small group of the leadership to de-brief before our departure from a site visit. This allows us to sum up before we leave and lets you know pretty much what will be in our report. Please give some thought to whether you want us to do this or not and, if you do, who you will want involved. It's your call. I will follow up this letter by keeping in touch with Therese McCoy who has been designated to handle logistics. I will attempt to answer any questions you have and go into more detail, if that will help. I hope the other people who have requested this assistance will free to call us, as well. Setting up the interviews should be a high priority as the dates set aside for on-site work are going to come up on us fast. We are relying on you to do the scheduling and handle the logistics for the interviews and the community meeting. << B -7>>

44 I have provided copies of this letter to Fran Zandi at NIC and to Mark Cunniff. If there are questions or you need assistance, please feel free to call me at or by at or Mark Cunniff at , or by at We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Robert C. Cushman NIC Consultant cc: Fran Zandi, NIC Mark Cunniff, NIC Consultant << B -8>>

45 Local Justice System Assessment - Interviews: Suggestions of People we should meet with: Orientation meeting - people who requested the technical assistance Sheriff & Jail -Sheriff, Undersheriff, Jail Administrator, Classification Officer During this time we would like to tour the jail. As part of the tour, we will visit informally with some line staff, program and support staff, etc., who may be on duty, and with inmates. We want to establish the inmate count for the day, and the locations and classifications of inmates being housed in the jail. Members of the CJCC District/Circuit Court Judge(s) County Court Judge Justice of the Peace (group meeting) District Attorney Public Defender/defense bar Sheriff & Local Police Chiefs Parole, Probation, Community Corrections Pretrial release staff, Officials of General Government & Others County Administrator, Budget Director County Legal Counsel County Board (Commissioners) Representatives Chair of relevant Board committees Information Systems (Jail data system) City Manger/Budget Director Criminal Justice Faculty (local university or college) Service Providers (combined meeting) Mental Health Medical Clergy Support Groups (AA, NA, etc.) Education Inspection Agencies (combined meeting? Fire Chief/Fire Marshall Health Department State Jail Standards (inspector) Community Meeting Thursday. (all day) De-briefing people who requested the technical assistance. * Try and keep our evenings free. We will need this time to de-brief and prepare for the Community Meeting. << B -9>>

46 Sample Local Justice System Assessment Community Meeting Agenda TIME SUBJECT 8:30 a. m. Registration. 9:00 a. m. Welcome and Introductions. 9:15 a. m. The National Institute of Corrections Local Justice System Assessment Program. 9:30 a. m. Historical Impact of changes in average Daily Jail Population: Number of Bookings and Lengths of Inmate Stays in Scott County. MN. 9:45 a.m. A Systems view - Seven Key Justice System Decision Points 10:15 a.m. Population, Crime, Jail and justice Trends Scott County 10:45 a.m. What do we know about changes in how the Jail is being used in Scott County? 11:30 a.m. Comparative Analysis of Crime and Justice System Indicators: Scott County. Compared to Other MN Counties. NOON Lunch (Jail Tours a possible option). 1:15 p. m. Review of Morning and Group Discussion of Implications 2:15 p. m. A Framework for Justice Planning and Coordination 2:45 p.m. Consultant Observations and Recommendations 3:45 p. m. Action Planning What are next steps? 4:00 p. m. Adjourn. << B -10>>

47 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ROBERT C. CUSHMAN Mr. Cushman has a lengthy and varied experience as a practitioner, planner, consultant, trainer, group facilitator, demonstration project director, researcher, evaluator, and writer in criminal justice. From 1985 to 2002, Mr. Cushman was employed as a Justice Systems Specialist in the Center for Urban Analysis, Office of the County Executive in Santa Clara County, California and as a consultant in the administration of justice. He led Santa Clara County s intergovernmental program to transfer justice simulation modeling software and technology to other units of government. He also conducted comparative studies of county justice system policies, expenditures and workloads. Prior to recent retirement, he worked as a Manager in the Administrative Office of the Courts, California State Judicial Council. Mr. Cushman is a consultant for the US. Department of Justice, the National Institute of Corrections, the National Association of Criminal Justice Planners, and units of state and local governments. Most of these assignments are focused on justice system-wide assessments to help communities more clearly diagnose their justice system problems and fashion more rational, coordinated and costeffective approaches to managing their justice systems. For example, under the sponsorship of the Jails or the Community Corrections Divisions of NIC, he has conducted more than three dozen county-level local justice system assessments during the past five years. Jail crowding was the presenting problem, which initiated most of these requests for technical assistance. Mr. Cushman is a past President and Board member of the Association for Criminal Justice Research (California), a member of the Board of the National Association of Criminal Justice Planners, a former Board member of the American Justice Institute and member of other justice related academic and professional organizations. Mr. Cushman is a former President of the American Justice Institute (AJI), a national non-profit justice research organization. From , he was a Project Director at AJI and administered many large, national research and demonstration projects. During this time Mr. Cushman was the author of several Program Model documents on criminal justice planning and community corrections. Mr. Cushman has published a number of important articles and reports. << B -11>>

48 Mark A. Cunniff Mr. Cunniff has been the Executive Director of the National Association of Criminal Justice Planners (NACJP) since The NACJP is a national membership organization that advocates the use of empirical data in portraying how the criminal justice system operates and fosters communication and coordination among criminal justice officials in the formulation and implementation of their policies and programs. Mr. Cunniff has expertise in the quantitative analysis of crime as well as criminal justice process and administrative data. At the start of his career, he worked with the team that undertook the initial analysis of the National Crime Victimization database for the Department of Justice. He subsequently led the effort to establish a national statistical series on felony court sentencing. The sentencing project also led to the examination of adult probation. The Department of Justice supported both of these undertakings. Mr. Cunniff has brought a systems approach to the examination of jail crowding either through contracts with county governments or under the auspices of the National Institute of Corrections. Among the counties in which he has worked are: Westchester (NY), Kane (IL), Jefferson (KY), Jefferson(CO); Denver (CO); Elkhart (IN); and Sebastian (AR). In the course of working with the NACJP membership, Mr. Cunniff became acquainted with many of the criminal justice initiatives of the 1980's and 1990's, including such programs as drug courts, community policing, crime prevention and emerging technology. He developed conferences that addressed these initiatives for the NACJP membership. He also covered these topics in the NACJP's newsletter. Mr. Cunniff received his Masters in Criminal Justice from the School of Criminal Justice at the State University of New York at Albany in Among some his publications are: o Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics, National Institute of Corrections (2002, Washington, DC) o Recidivism of Felons on Probation, , Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report (1992, Washington, DC) o The Scales of Justice: Sentencing Outcomes in 18 Felony Courts, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report (1984, Washington, DC) << B -12>>

49 Appendix C Interview List & Consultant Schedule NIC Site Visit Schedule May 19, :00 to 8:45 Meeting with Commissioner Jon Ulrich, Sheriff Kevin Studnicka and Interim County Administrator Gary Shelton. 8:45 to 10:00 Tour of Jail 10:00 to 10:45 Interview with Jail Administrator Bonnie Case 11:00 to 11:45 Interview with Board Chair Commissioner Ulrich 12:00 to 1:00 Interview with the District Judges (William Macklin, Carol Hooten, Diane Hansen, Mike Fahey, Jerome Abrams, Carrie Lennon) 1:00 to 1:30 Break 2:00 to 2:45 Interview with Mental Health and Public Health and Jail Facility Nursing (Dr. Terry Raddatz/Mental Health, Merrilee Brown/Public Health and Nancy Namur &Missy Dellwo/Jail Facility Nursing. 3:00 to 4:00 Interviews with County Attorney and City Prosecution (Pat Ciliberto and Bill Strait) 4:00 to 4:45 Interview with Gary Shelton and CFO Kevin Ellsworth May 20, :30 to 8:15 Interview with Richard Mulcrone, Chair of the Community Corrections Board 8:15 to 9:00 Interview with Court Administrator Greg Ess 9:00 to 10:00 Interview with Sheriff Studnicka and Chief Deputy, Dean Opatz 10:00 to 11:00 Interview with Chiefs of Police (Bill O Rourke, Rodney Seurer, Mark Vosejpka, Bob Malz, Dave Lanning, Richard Jensen, Dan Hughes) 11:00 to 12:00 Kevin and Brian to talk about how the jail analysis was done 12:00 to 12:45 Interview with Commissioner Marschall, Vice Chair 1:00 to 1:45 Interviews with Jail Inspectors (Sarah Johnson/DOC, Steve Diaz/DOH and Kerry Queen/State Fire Marshall) <<C - 1>>

50 1:45 to 2:30 Interviews with Al Godfrey, Community Corrections Director 3:00 to 3:45 Interviews with City Managers (Thomas Terry, Mark McNeil, David Murphy, Frank Boyle, Michael Johnson, Ed Shukle) 4:00 to 4:45 Interviews with Public Defenders (Steve Holmgren and Tom O Conner) 4:45 to 5:30 Interviews with Jail Program Volunteers (Jane Wiley/ Volunteer Coordinator. Karen Selby/Bible Study&Church Service, Tony Dock/Bible Study, Fran Otto/ AA) 9:00 to 4:00 Community Meeting May 21, :00 Debriefing with Gary Shelton, Kevin Studnicka and Barb Marschall <<C - 2>>

51 Local Justice System Assessment Community Meeting Agenda May 21, 2009 Scott County Law Enforcement Center TIME SUBJECT 8:30 a.m. Registration 9:00 a.m. Welcome and Introductions 9:15 a.m. The National Institute of Corrections Local Justice System Assessment Program 9:30 a.m. Historical Impact of changes in average Daily Jail Population: Number of Bookings and Lengths of Inmate Stays in Scott County. MN 9:45 a.m. A Systems view - Seven Key Justice System Decision Points 10:15 a.m. Population, Crime, Jail and justice Trends Scott County 10:45 a.m. What do we know about changes in how the Jail is being used in Scott County? 11:30 a.m. Comparative Analysis of Crime and Justice System Indicators: Scott County Compared to Other MN Counties NOON Lunch 1:15 p.m. Review of Morning and Group Discussion of Implications 2:15 p.m. A Framework for Justice Planning and Coordination 2:45 p.m. Consultant Observations and Recommendations 3:45 p.m. Action Planning What are next steps? 4:00 p.m. Adjourn <<C - 3>>

52 <<C - 4>>

53 Explaining Jail Crowding An Analysis Of Changes in the Number of Bookings/Admissions and Average Length of Inmate Stays In the Scott County (MN) Jail System Prepared in Support of a Local Justice System Assessment Sponsored by the National Institute of Corrections Prepared by Robert C. Cushman NIC Consultant NIC TA # 09J1039 May <<D - 1>>

54 <<D - 2>>

55 Executive Summary This analysis examines a recent 72-month period in which the jail population ranged from a low of 65.8 inmates to a high of 157 inmates. It shows how changes in the number of bookings and length of inmate stays produced these fluctuations in the average daily jail population. Over the entire period about 20% of the increase in the average daily jail population has been driven by an increase in admissions. About 80% of the increase has been driven by longer inmate lengths of stay in jail. The purpose of the analysis is to demonstrate how jail occupancy levels can be managed. It sets forth the technical and managerial requirements for controlling the size and character of the jail population in Scott County. 1 The historical average daily jail population from January 2003 to December 2008 is divided into twelve periods of rising and declining jail occupancy levels. Data is provided to show how the booking/length of stay dynamic moved the size of the jail population higher or lower. The report concludes with a template that Scott County can use to continue this analysis into the future. Instructions are provided which will allow Scott County to model the impact of any planned changes in bookings, or length of inmate stays. Next Steps The swings in the size and make up of the average daily jail population are not evenly spread across the various subpopulations of the jail. At times, one or two of the many types of bookings play a disproportionate role in driving the jail population higher. At other times, a change in jail occupancy can be traced to a dramatic change in the length of stay of one or more inmate types. For these reasons, it is important to develop the capability to analyze the bookings and lengths of stay of a wide variety of inmate types. This will allow officials to identify certain key subsets of the jail admissions and average daily population that need attention. 1 More detailed additional information will be found in two basic publications: Preventing Jail Crowding: A Practical Guide, available in.pdf format at: and, Jail Crowding: Understanding Jail Population Dynamics, available in.pdf format at: <<D - 3>>

56 <<D - 4>>

57 Introduction The purpose of the analysis is to show how Scott County can determine how much of the change in the average daily population of the County (MN) Jail System is driven by a change in the number of bookings/admissions to the jail vs. changes in the length of inmate stays in jail. Corrections Office Amy Landa and Sergeant Coleen Szabo of the Sheriff s Office provided the number of monthly bookings into the Scott County Jail System for the period January 2003 through December Data for the early years was not available in machine-readable form. This finding, alone, is important; for it suggests that the data needed to do this kind of analysis is not routinely available in Scott County. Also, it took a lot of work and a special effort for the staff to collect this information, by hand. 2 In addition, we caution the reader about data problems. For example, the jail staff told us that the average daily jail population data from the jail s New World data system (NWS) does not match the average daily jail population data that comes from the State s DIS. A number of factors could account for this. Still, the users of the data do not understand why the numbers differ and this leads to caution about using them to support decision-making. Despite these limitations, it is the method described here that the consultants seek to convey. At this point it is more important to understand the concept and how it can be applied to better understand jail population dynamics, than to focus on problems with the data. The consultants seek to demonstrate the kind of analysis that will allow officials to better understand why and how the jail population changes. 3 This is a pre-requisite for being able to successfully mange the size and characteristics of the confined population. Findings The average length of jail stay (ALS), the average daily jail population (ADP), and the number of admissions (bookings) into the jail fluctuated over the 72-month period, January 2003 December We give immense credit the Sgt. Colleen Szabo and her staff for collecting this information. 3 The formulas for each calculation in the tables appear at the end of the appendixes. <<D - 5>>

58 Table 1 shows the monthly average high and low marks for these selected indicators. Table 1: Highlights Monthly High and Low Marks for Selected Indicators Indicator Lowest Highest Average Length of 5.0 days in March days in Sept Inmate Stay (Days) Average Daily Jail Population 65.8 inmates in December inmates in Sept Bookings/Jail Admissions 288 Bookings in Feb bookings in Oct During this period, the average daily inmate population increased by 44.7 inmates. In other words, an additional 44.7 beds were required to house inmates. Twenty percent of the increase (8.9 additional beds) was required because of an increase in the number of bookings. The other 80% of the increase (35.8 additional beds) was required because of an increase in the length of inmate stays. (Detail is provided in the last row of Table 2 & Table 6). Approach to the Analysis The month-by-month data were split into separate periods defined by the high and low monthly average daily populations for each year. Each period was examined to determine how much of the rise and fall of the average daily population during each period was due to a change in the number of bookings and/or change in the average length of inmate stays. The following table summarizes the results. <<D - 6>>

59 Table 2: Summary of Monthly Average Highs and Lows in the Average Daily Jail Population For Twelve Periods, January 2003 through December 2008 Change Number Number of in Ave. of Jail Beds Jail Beds Daily Required by Required by Jail Change in Change in Period Pop. Bookings ALS Reference Period and Average During During During Number Daily Jail Population Period Period Period 1 Jan03 to Sept03: Sep03 to Dec03: Dec03 to April04: April04 to Oct04: Oct04 to Feb05: Feb05 to May05: May05 to Jan06: Jan06 to Jun06: Jun06 to Jan07: Jan07 to July07: July07 to Sept08: Sept08 to Dec08: Total Jan03 to Dec08: How To Read the Table We will use three examples to illustrate how to read the table. Our first example refers to reference period #1, the first row of Table 2. It shows the monthly average daily inmate population in the Scott County Jail system increased from 78.6 inmates in January 2003 to 83.5 inmates in September This is a total change of 4.9 inmates. It means 4.9 additional beds were required. The 4.9 beds is the NET result of a need for -8.7 fewer beds because of a decrease in the number bookings during the month, off-set by a need for 13.6 additional beds because of an increase in the average length of inmate stays. 4 4 The method of calculation is presented at the end of this report. The month by month numbers appear in Table 6, also at the end of this report. <<D - 7>>

60 Here is a second example: Results for the second reference period appear in the second row of the table. Here we saw a drop of in the average daily jail population (from 83.5 in September 2003 to 65.8 in December, 2003). In this period, the average daily population decreased because BOTH bookings and the average length of stay decreased. Fewer bookings resulted in a reduction of -5.4 beds. A shorter average length of inmate stay further reduced the bed need by another beds. These add to a total of fewer beds required to house inmates during this period. Here is a third example: In period #4, we see how an increase in both bookings and the average length of stay can combine to quickly propel the average daily population higher. In this case (April 2004 to October 2004) the average daily jail population increased by 31.6 inmates. Additional beds for 13.2 inmates were needed because there were more bookings and another 18.4 beds were needed because the average length of stay increased. Examination of these 12 periods documents how increases in the number of bookings and increases in length of inmates stays have both driven the jail population occupancy level higher and how the influence of these two factors ebbs and flows. In many months, the change in the number of bookings and lengths of stay work to off set each other. This is often the case if we look at the month-tomonth data. 5 However, as demonstrated in table 2, when the number of bookings and average length of stay move in the same direction, they can combine to quickly drive the average daily jail population higher. Average length of Stay The median monthly ALS over the seventy-two months was 7.5 days. This means that in half of the 72 months, the average length of stay was less than 7.5 days, and in the other half of the 72 months, it exceeded 7.5 days. Lengths of Stay: Under 7.0 days = 26 of the 72 months, or about 1/3 rd of the months. Under 8.0 days = 50 of the 72 months or, about 70% of the months. Under 9.0 days = 64 of the 72 months, or about 90% of the months. The average length of inmate stays more than doubled over the 72-month period. As noted in Table 1, the average inmate length (ALS) of stay for 5 See table 6. <<D - 8>>

61 each month ranged from 5.0 days to 10.3 days. This has had a dramatic effect on the number of beds required to house inmates. Table 6, which gives the month- by-month detail, shows a gradual, persistent increase in the average length of stay from 2003 through Most of the months with the shorter average lengths of stay were in 2003 and 2004, while the longer lengths of stay show up toward the end of Extending the data in the table would help determine if this trend is continuing. Potential Bed Day Savings: Impact of Reducing the Average Length of Stay The data provided here can be used to model the expected average daily population, given a planned change in either the average length of stay or bookings, or both. We provide, first, the method for modeling the impact of a reduction in the average length of inmate stays. In this example, we selected the longest monthly average length of stay (10.3 days) and assumed the monthly number of bookings for that month would approximate the monthly average number of bookings for the year. These two data points are all that is needed to exercise the model. This result shows that reducing the average length of inmate stays from 10.3 days to 8.0 days would reduce the average daily inmate population from 155 to 120 inmates. This is NOT A RECOMMENDATION. It is an example, designed to show the method and the calculations. The officials who are responsible for operating the justice system within Scott County may or may not wish to reduce the average length of inmate stays. Scott County will need to determine what is possible/desirable/feasible. <<D - 9>>

62 Table 3: Impact of Reducing the Average Length of Inmate Stay from 10.3 days to 8.0 Days. 6 Average Length of Stay (days) Jail Person Days Required Average Daily Jail Population Period Compared Number of Bookings Months In Year Sept , Future , The basic calculations are: 1. (Number of monthly bookings) x (Number of months in the year) x (Average length of stay) = Jail Person Days Required; then, 2. Jail Person Days Required divided by 365 days in the year = Average Daily Jail Population. Bookings/Admissions The average number of monthly admissions (bookings) to the jail system also gradually increased over the seventy-two month period. If the month-to-month changes were placed on a graph, though, it would show many ups and downs. There is much variation. The median number of bookings is In half of the months the number of bookings was higher; in the other half, they were less. Number of Monthly Bookings: Less than 397 bookings per month = 24 of the 72 months, or about 1/3 rd of the months. Less than 447 bookings per month = 50 of the 72 months or, about 70% of the months. Less than 488 bookings per month = 65 of the 72 months, or about 90% of the months. A similar method can be used to model how a reduction in the number of bookings (admissions) would reduce the average daily jail population. This, too, is not a recommendation. The monthly number of bookings has been selected arbitrarily, just to illustrate the approach 6 The bed days required is the product of the number of monthly bookings x 12 months x the average length of stay. The resulting average daily population is calculated by dividing the number of days required by 365 days. About 25% of the 72 months had monthly bookings in excess of 456 per month. <<D - 10>>

63 To exercise the model, we arbitrarily reduce the average number of monthly bookings to the median average of the 72-month period; that is to 429 bookings per month. This is only 27 fewer bookings per month than used in the previous example. The same high average length of stay is used (10.3 days). This scenario drops the average daily inmate population from to inmates. Table 4: The Impact of Reducing Bookings Into the Jail Average Length of Stay (days) Jail Person Days Required Average Daily Jail Population Period Compared Number of Bookings Months In Year Sept , Future , The Impact of Reducing BOTH Length of Stay and the Number of Bookings This final illustration shows the impact of combining the two methods; that is, of reducing the average length of stay from 10.3 days to 8.0 days, and reducing the average number of bookings from 456 to 429. The results appear in Table 5. Table 5: Illustration of the Combined Impact of Reducing Both the Length of Stay and the Number of Admissions. Average Length of Stay (days) Jail Person Days Required Average Daily Jail Population Period Compared Number of Bookings Months In Year Sept , Future , Extending the Model The swings in the size and make up of the average daily jail population are not evenly spread across the various subpopulations of the jail. At times, one or two of the many types of bookings play a disproportionate role in driving the jail population higher. At other times, a change in jail occupancy can be traced to a dramatic change in the length of stay of one or more inmate types. For this reason, it is important to develop the capability to analyze the bookings and lengths of stay of a wide variety of inmate types. This will allow officials to identify certain key subsets of the jail admissions and <<D - 11>>

64 average daily population that need attention. These can be referred to as hot spots, revealed by the analysis. A separate report, prepared by NIC consultant, Mark Cunniff will provide additional detail to show how certain subsets of inmates have driven the jail population higher. (See: Jail Utilization Analysis) Modeling a Change in Confinement Policy Once data is organized for inmate subgroups, this same approach can be used to model what the average daily inmate population would look like if certain types of inmates were held longer, and/or if other types of inmates were held for shorter periods of time in jail. This would represent an attempt to improve public protection by allocating more days of incapacitation to high-risk offenders and, if desirable, fewer jail days to low risk offenders. Modeling What Would Need to Happen To Fill the Jail To Capacity This same approach can also be employed to determine the changes in number of bookings and average length of stay that would fill the jail to its operational or design capacity. 7 The exercise could hold bookings at their current levels and determine what average length of stay would fill the jail. Or, the exercise could, instead, hold the ALS steady and determine how many additional bookings would fill the jail. Or, some combination of a change in bookings and ALS could be modeled In summary, remedial or proactive changes in jail occupancy levels can be accomplished in three ways: 1. Reduce/increase the average length of inmate stays; 2. Reduce/increase the number of monthly bookings; or, 3. Reduce/increase both the number of bookings and the average length of stay. Additional Analyses Needed These same tables can be constructed for any subpopulation of inmates in the jail. All that will be needed to do these additional analyses is the number of bookings and the average daily jail population of any subgroup 7 We note that a jail has a design capacity, usually defined as the number of beds. It also has an operational capacity, a number that will be lower than the total number of beds. This is necessary, to maintain the integrity of the inmate classification system. For example, to make sure females are housed separately from males. <<D - 12>>

65 in the jail. It would be useful, for example, to repeat this analysis separately for: Men and for women; Felony admissions vs. misdemeanor admissions; Fresh arrests vs. arrests for failing to comply (FTA, Failure to pay, etc.) These analyses would help isolate the characteristics of the group(s) that are most responsible for changes in the average daily jail population. It is unlikely these changes occur evenly across all inmate subtypes. Usually, most of the change can be attributed to a few inmate subgroups. Managing the size of these subgroups is the key to jail population management. Conclusion 1. Managing jail system occupancy levels can only be accomplished in three ways: a) Increase bed space capacity; b) decrease admissions; and c) decrease average lengths of inmate stays. While one or more of these three strategies may be easier, technically or politically, employing all three strategies will make it easier to manage the future size of the jail system population. 2. There is significant month-to-month and quarter-to-quarter variation in the number of bookings and average length of stay. These fluctuations appear to stem from changes in decision-making about cases and people as they make their passage through the justice system, not erratic swings in the behavior of the criminal population. 3. Managing the size of the jail system population will depend upon achieving agreements about changes in justice system policies. This is because changes in the size of the jail population are primarily the result of changes in the response of the justice system. 4. A jail population analysis system that provides continuous information about changes in bookings and lengths of stay of inmate population subgroups will permit policy makers to better understand and mange the size and character of the jail population. <<D - 13>>

66 5. Scott County should establish a basic jail population analysis system. 8 No new data is required. The data needed by such a system is already collected and in the County information system. It simply needs to be put into a proper form, analyzed and routinely reported out. 6. The jail population analysis system should be used to continuously determine if programs that have been/are being initiated to reduce crowding and/or change the composition of the jail population are meeting their intended objectives. Example: A new program is developed with the objective of reducing the number of bed days of a specific type of inmate population. A jail population analysis should be undertaken to determine a baseline of the number of jail bookings and the number of bed days absorbed by this group prior to this change. The same data should be collected, analyzed and periodically reported out in the months following the initiation of the program. Explanation of How the Analysis is Done The appendix to this report contains the detailed table (Table 6) that was referenced earlier in this report. It contains the data for each of the 72 months used in this analysis. The table is a template for future use. It concludes with step-by-step instructions for completing a similar table in the future, or for extending the data in the existing table for coming months. 8 A very basic jail population analysis system is described in a short 12-page publication available free from the National Institute of Corrections. See: Preventing Jail Crowding: A Practical Guide, NIC publication number , available from the National Institute of Corrections Information Center, or send an request for the publication to asknicic@nicic.org. The publication is free. An electronic download PDF version of the publication is also available at <<D - 14>>

67 Table 6:Average Daily Jail Population: Portion Due to Change in Bookings vs. Change in Average Length of Jail Stay January 2003 Through December 2008: Scott County Jail System A B C D E F G H I J K Change Change In Estimated Number Number Number of Ave. in Ave. Number Total Number Number Average of Bed Days of Jail Beds Jail Beds Year Daily Daily of Days Person of of Length of Consumed by Required by Required by and Jail Jail in Days Jail Jail Stay Change in Change in Change in Month Pop. Pop. Period In Jail Bookings Bookings (days) Bookings Bookiings ALS n/a n/a 6.6 n/a n/a n/a <<D - 15>>

68 Table 6:Average Daily Jail Population: Portion Due to Change in Bookings vs. Change in Average Length of Jail Stay January 2003 Through December 2008: Scott County Jail System A B C D E F G H I J K Change Change In Estimated Number Number Number of Ave. in Ave. Number Total Number Number Average of Bed Days of Jail Beds Jail Beds Year Daily Daily of Days Person of of Length of Consumed by Required by Required by and Jail Jail in Days Jail Jail Stay Change in Change in Change in Month Pop. Pop. Period In Jail Bookings Bookings (days) Bookings Bookiings ALS <<D - 16>>

69 Table 6:Average Daily Jail Population: Portion Due to Change in Bookings vs. Change in Average Length of Jail Stay January 2003 Through December 2008: Scott County Jail System A B C D E F G H I J K Change Change In Estimated Number Number Number of Ave. in Ave. Number Total Number Number Average of Bed Days of Jail Beds Jail Beds Year Daily Daily of Days Person of of Length of Consumed by Required by Required by and Jail Jail in Days Jail Jail Stay Change in Change in Change in Month Pop. Pop. Period In Jail Bookings Bookings (days) Bookings Bookiings ALS Totals <<D - 17>>

70 Instructions for Constructing the Table Template in a Spreadsheet 1. Input the following data: Year and month in column. A; Average daily population in column B; Number of Days in Period in column D; and, Number of Jail Bookings in column F. 2. Calculate Change in Average Daily Population (Col. C) (C= current B minus previous B) 3. Calculate Total Person Days in Jail (Col. E) (E= B times D) 4. Calculate Change in Number of Jail Bookings (Col. G) (G = Current F minus Previous F) 5. Calculate Estimated Average Length of Jail Stay (Col. H) H = E divided by F 6. Number of Bed Days Consumed by Change in Bookings (Col I) I = Current G times previous H 7. Number of Jail Beds Required by Change in Bookings (Col. J) J = I divided by D 8. Number of Jail Beds Required b Change in Average Length of Stay (Col. K) K= C minus J 9. Total Change in Average Daily Population (total of Col. B) Total Change in B = last B minus first B 10. To Get Totals, sum all Cs, Js and Ks. <<D - 18>>

71 Appendix E Jail Bed Utilization Analysis January/February, 2004 & 2009 Scott County (MN) Prepared by: Mark Cunniff NIC Consultant NIC TA #: 09 J 1039 April 19, 2009

72 Highlights 1. Bookings are up substantially not only for persons under the jurisdiction of the Scott County justice system, but also for contract inmates under the jurisdiction of non-scott County authorities. 2. Jail bed demand increased among contract inmates and these contract inmates now comprise one-quarter of the Scott County s jail population. 3. The pressure for more jail beds attributable to increased bookings has been neutralized by shorter jail stays. 4. The shorter jail stay was driven by two developments: a large increase in bookings involving short stays and a sharp decrease in bookings involving stays ranging from 31 to 90 days. 5. The demographic profile of the jail population is that of a young white male who is not a resident of Scott County. 6. Senior citizens (50 years of age or older) experienced a sharp increase in jail bed demand. 7. Females booked into the jail increased substantially. 8. Males drove the entire decrease in jail bed consumption due to a shortening in their jail stays. 9. There was a substantially higher increase in bookings for Hispanics than for non-hispanics. 10. More than half of the county s jail beds are consumed by non-county residents. 11. Nearly all of the decreased demand for jail beds originated with Scott County residents. 12. Prior bookings into the jail correlate with jail stays; i.e., the more prior bookings that a person has, the longer the jail stay. 13. Municipal police departments generate two-thirds of the bookings into the jail. 14. Persons who are released to another agency consumed nearly half of the jail s beds in There is a correlation between the number of charges associated with the booking and jail stay: the more charges there are, the longer the jail stay. 16. Inmates with felony charges consumed more than half of the county s jail beds. 17. There were sharp declines in jail bed consumption for inmates with charges involving crimes against the person or failure to comply with court orders. 18. Three offense categories showed notable increase in jail bed demand: burglary/theft; other property offenses; and drug offenses. 1

73 Background The principal purpose of this analysis is to illustrate the processes that should be undertaken to create a database from an existing information system that is suitable for an examination of jail bed utilization in Scott County. This analysis also affords the opportunity to not only make preliminary observations about the characteristics of inmates, their processing and charges, but also on changes in the use of the Scott County jail beds between 2004 and This analysis is based on a listing of data elements that the NIC consultant submitted to Scott County. Mr. Mike O Connell of the Scott County s IT Department extracted the requested data from the jail s computer system. He provided an Excel spreadsheet that contained the requested jail data. Data was provided on all persons who left the jail during the months of January and February for the years 2004 and The spreadsheet included information on juvenile bookings and adult bookings as well information on persons being held in the Scott County jail under contract with other jurisdictions. Documentation on the various coded variables in the data base accompanied the Excel spreadsheet. A. Creating the NIC database The information in the Excel data file was processed to create variables that were more conducive for analysis. For example, address information was used to create a variable on the residency of the inmate (in county versus out of county). In other instances, the response range to a variable was reduced from a multitude of responses to a more limited response range. For example, there were over 200 offense citations associated with the inmates in these files. These citations were consolidated into an offense classification scheme that employs eight offense categories (see Attachment B). Another data processing issue involves the computation of length of stay. The common practice among jail administrators (including Scott County) is to count any portion of a single day served in the jail as a full day in the jail. For example, a person booked into the jail at 6:00 PM and who leaves at 10:00 AM the next day is scored as having spent two days in the jail. Length of stay in this analysis is calculated as follows: the booking date is subtracted from the exit date and one day is added to this computation. 2 A codebook was created to document the variables in the database, including the responses associated with each of the data elements. This codebook appears as Attachment A to the report. This codebook is supplemented with a crime classification scheme (Attachment B) that enumerates each of the individual charges comprising the different offense categories employed in this analysis. Attachment C provides the raw data that was used to compute the various statistics presented in the tables of this report. B. Target Population As shown in Table 1, there were a total of 957 bookings into the jail s information system in January/February, 2009, which represents a substantial increase (31%) in activity from While adult bookings under the jurisdiction of the county increased at a substantial rate (28%), the growth in adult contract bookings was astronomical (243%). There were no electronic home detention (EHD) bookings in 2009 in contrast to the 44 bookings in Bookings were up substantially for those juveniles under the jurisdiction of Scott County while they were down substantially for contract juveniles. 1 These findings are based on only two months worth of data. The county should undertake an effort to validate these findings by using six to twelve months of data for each year. 2 If a person spends any portion of a day in the jail, the computation here counts this partial day as a full day. 2

74 Table 1 Number of bookings in the Scott County Jail's Computer System by booking status January/February 2004 and %Change Total Bookings % Scott County Adults in Jail % Scott County Adults on EHD 44 0 Contract Adults % Scott County Juveniles % Contract Juveniles % As will be discussed in more detail later in this report, bookings comprise only one part of the equation that affects the demand for jail beds. The other part of the equation involves the length of stay in the jail. Jail stay declined between 2004 and 2009 for adult Scott County inmates (falling from 9 days to 7 days). There was also a decline in the jail stay for adult contract inmates (falling from 32 days to 13 days). 3 Consequently, this decline in jail stay neutralized the increased demand for jail beds that the growth in bookings might otherwise have achieved. Table 2 Number of Jail Beds Consumed in Scott County by Offender's Status %Change Total Adults 114 beds 121 beds 6% Scott County Adults in Jail 92 beds 90 beds -2% Contract Adults 22 beds 31 beds 43% As shown in Table 2, total jail bed consumption increased by 6% between 2004 and This overall increase is driven by the increase in jail bed demand among contract inmates (up 43%). The demand for jail beds among those inmates under the jurisdiction of Scott County experienced a slight decline (down -2%). Clearly, contract inmates are an important segment of the Scott County jail population (consuming 25% of the 2009 jail beds), but they are not focus of this analysis. The NIC Justice System Assessment focuses on local justice processes. Consequently, all bookings into the jail s information system that involved juveniles are excluded from this analysis. Because the focus here is on jail bed utilization, all persons in the EHD program were also deleted from this analysis. Finally, because the focus of this analysis is on how the Scott County justice system utilizes the jail s bed space, all bookings involving contract inmates are also excluded from the analysis. The analysis now turns solely to those adult bookings into the jail that were under the jurisdiction of Scott County. C. Findings 1. Overview There are two variables that determine the demand for jail beds: the number of persons entering the jail and the amount of time that these persons stay in the facility. Table 3 summarizes the overall jail dynamic for Scott 3 The average length of stay for those persons in the EHD program was 38 days. 3

75 County by presenting three statistics that deal with jail utilization. 4 One measure uses bookings 5 as the unit of count, another represents the inmate s average stay in the jail and the third measure examines jail beds consumed. 6 The percent change in jail inmates, length of stay and jail bed consumption between 2004 and 2009 are also provided in Table 3. Table 3 Changes in Scott County jail inmates between 2004 and 2009 (excludes contract inmates and persons in the EHD program) Change Bookings 28% Average Stay -25% 9 Days 7 Days Beds Consumed -2% 92 Beds 90 Beds During the months of January and February, 2009, a total of 742 inmates left the jail by posting bond, serving their sentence or some other means, such as being transferred to another agency, such as the Minnesota Department of Corrections. These persons spent an average of 7 days in the Scott County jail between their being booked into the jail and their eventual release from the jail. Between 2004 and 2009 jail bed demand declined by two beds (90 minus 92), a -2% decrease. Bookings were up substantially (28%). However, there was an almost equal percentage decrease in the average jail stay (down -25%). Consequently, the decrease in average stay neutralized the increased demand for jail beds that would have been otherwise generated by the increase in bookings. 2. Length of Stay There is a tendency to rely solely on measures using inmates as the units of analysis in examining jail population characteristics. Such an approach provides an incomplete picture of the jail dynamic as it ignores the length of stay associated with various segments of the jail population. Length of stay can, and does, vary by demographic, processing and charge characteristics. Consequently, statistical profiles of the jail population can change when the unit of analysis shifts from people to jail beds consumed. For example, one group of ten inmates may have consumed a total of 100 bed days (LOS = 10 days) while another group of ten inmates may have consumed a total of 1,000 bed days (LOS = 100 days). These two groups manifest substantially different impacts on jail usage and the LOS is an appropriate measure for documenting such differential demands. The combined data on bookings and jail stay is captured in a measure called, jail beds consumed. The percentage share of jail beds consumed is a complementary statistic used in this report that provides a more comprehensive overview of the demand for jail beds. Two sets of tables are used in the examination of demographic, processing and charge characteristics of persons booked into the Scott County jail. The first set of tables examines the 2009 profile for bookings, length of stay and jail bed consumption while the second set of tables examines changes in bookings, length of stay and jail bed demand between 2004 and The analysis commences with an examination of length of stay. 4 Attachment C contains the raw numbers that were used in calculating the various statistical measures presented in this report. 5 The use of the word, bookings, here is technically incorrect as this study focuses on persons who left the jail. All of these persons, however, were booked into the jail at one point in time. Rather than use a term, such as jail exits, which is not part of the lexicon usually associated with jail population analyses, this report has elected to use a term that readers are accustomed to seeing in jail analyses. 6 Jail beds are computed as follows: the number of bed days consumed divided by 61 (the number of days covered in the analysis). 4

76 There are inmate groups that have a large number of persons, but who have a short length of stay (LOS). These groups with a short LOS will have less impact on jail bed consumption than a group with a modest number of inmates with a long LOS. The most dramatic example of this phenomenon involves the length of time that an inmate spends in the jail (see Table 4A). In 2009, persons spending less than three days in the jail comprised two-thirds (68%) of the people booked into the jail, but they consumed only 12% of the jail s beds (11 beds). These short term inmates have more of an impact on the jail s booking area than on the demand for jail beds. Conversely, persons who spend more than 90 days in the jail comprise only 2% of the persons booked into the jail, but they consumed more than two-fifths (43%) of the jail s beds (39 beds). Table 4A Number of jail inmates, their average jail stay and jail beds consumed By length of stay in the jail Trends Percent Percent Share of Average Jail Beds Share of Bookings Jail Stay Consumed Jail Beds Total 100% 7 Days 90 Beds 100% <3 days 68% 1 Days 11 Beds 12% 3-7 days 21% 4 Days 11 Beds 12% 8-30 days 8% 16 Days 16 Beds 18% days 2% 50 Days 14 Beds 15% >90 days 2% 162 Days 39 Beds 43% Bookings involving persons with jail stays of a week or less increased substantially between 2004 and 2009 (Table 4B). These increased bookings, however, generated only a modest increase in the demand for jail beds. For example, while there was a 34% increase in bookings involving jail stay of less than three days, this increase only generated demand for an additional three jail beds. Bookings involving persons who stayed in the jail between 31 and 90 days decreased substantially (down -33%). This decrease reduced jail bed demand by -31% requiring six fewer beds in 2009 than in Table 4B Changes in bookings, average stay and jail beds consumed by length of stay C H A N G E: TO Jail Bed Bookings Jail Stay Demand Jail Beds Total 28% -25% -2% -2 Beds <3 days 34% -4% 30% 3 Beds 3-7 days 28% 4% 35% 3 Beds 8-30 days 9% -9% 1% 0 Beds days -33% 1% -31% -6 Beds >90 days 56% -39% -3% -1 Beds Persons with stays of more than 90 days generated a modest decrease in their demand for jail beds (down one bed). While bookings were up substantially for this group (up 56%), a much shorter stay (falling from 265 days to 162 days) neutralized the increase in bookings so as to reduce jail bed demand by one bed. 5

77 In summary, two trends drove down the overall average jail stay: the large increase in the number of bookings involving short stays and the drop in bookings involving jail stays ranging from 31 to 90 days. The first trend contributes to a mathematical dynamic that leads to a reduction in jail stay while the second trend reflects a real drop jail bed demand. Figure 1 The number of persons leaving the Scott County Jail and the number of jail beds consumed by the length of stay in the jail 1/1 thru 2/28/29 for 2004 and 2009 Bookings Jail Beds J A I L --- B E D C O N S U M E D _ _ 0 0 < than 3 to or < than 3 to or 3 days days days days more days 3 days days days days more days Length of stay in the jail Length of stay in the jail 6

78 The formula for computing the average jail stay is: total number of bed days consumed (the numerator) divided by the number of bookings (the denominator). Bookings involving stays of less than a week increased the denominator substantially but only increased the numerator marginally. There is no real decrease in bed days consumed. Rather, the large number of bookings with short stays mathematically pushes the average jail stay down. The drop in bookings for persons with stays ranging from 31 to 90 days, on the other hand, decreased the numerator substantially with only a marginal impact on the denominator. This trend reflects a real decrease in bed days consumed and thus contributes to the shorter overall jail stay found for the 2009 inmates. The statistics from Tables 4A and 4B are depicted in Figure 1. In Figure 1, the bars represent the values for The dashes within or above the bars represent the 2004 values. 3. Inmate Characteristics The overall profile of the Scott County jail population is that of a young white male who is not a resident of the county. Young adults (18 to 34 years of age) comprise nearly six out of ten of the bookings into the jail (59%). Their average stay matches the overall average stay, so their share of jail beds consumed correlates with their share of total bookings (58%). Middle-aged persons (35 to 49 years of age) have a slightly longer jail stay than the young adults (eight days versus seven days) and they consume one-third of the jail s beds (34%). Seniors (50 or older) represent a distinct minority in the jail. They have the shortest stay (six days) and they consume less than one-tenth of jail s beds (7%). Table 5A Number of jail inmates, their average jail stay and jail beds consumed By selected inmate characteristics Percent Percent Share of Average Jail Beds Share of Bookings Jail Stay Consumed Jail Beds Total 100% 7 Days 90 Beds 100% % 7 Days 52 Beds 58% % 8 Days 31 Beds 34% 50 plus 8% 6 Days 7 Beds 7% Male 73% 9 Days 81 Beds 91% Female 27% 2 Days 8 Beds 9% Hispanic 18% 9 Days 21 Beds 24% Non-Hispanic 82% 7 Days 68 Beds 76% White 78% 7 Days 66 Beds 73% Black 13% 9 Days 14 Beds 16% Other 8% 9 Days 9 Beds 11% NA 1% 1 Days 0 Beds 0% Shakopee 17% 6 Days 14 Beds 15% Scott Co. 29% 7 Days 25 Beds 28% MN County 48% 8 Days 46 Beds 52% Out of State 6% 6 Days 4 Beds 5% Nearly three out of four bookings involve males (73%). Males, however, experience much longer jail stays than females (nine days versus two days). Due to their longer stays, males consume more than nine out of ten of the jail s beds (91%). 7

79 Hispanics experience longer jail stays than non-hispanics (nine days versus seven days). 7 contributes to their being consumers of nearly one out of four jail beds (24%). 8 This longer stay More than three out of four persons booked into the jail are white (78%). Jail stays for whites are shorter than those for Blacks (seven days versus nine days). More than half the persons booked into the jail reside outside of Scott County and they consume more than half of the jail s beds. Within Scott County, residents of Shakopee comprise a major segment of all bookings into the jail (17%). Trends There is a very curious development with the age variable. Bookings involving seniors (50 or older) doubled (103%) versus more moderate growth for the youth and middle-aged groups (up 22% and 27% respectively). Not only did the bookings increase for seniors, but their jail stays also increased in contrast to the decline in jail stays for the youth and middle-aged inmates. Why would the group, whose involvement in the justice system is expected to be low, experience such a sharp increase in the demand for jail beds (up 124%)? This is pointed out because a similar pattern has been documented in analyses conducted in other counties across the United States. At this time there is no clear understanding as to why this is occurring or whether this trend will continue into the future. Local officials should continue to monitor senior bookings to determine whether or not their much higher increased demand for jail beds than the more youthful segments of the jail population continues and what might be the forces behind these increases. Table 5B Changes in bookings, average stay and jail beds consumed by inmate demographic characteristics C H A N G E: TO Jail Bed Bookings Jail Stay Demand Jail Beds Total 28% -25% -2% -2 Beds % -34% -19% -12 Beds % -2% 26% 6 Beds 50 plus 103% 10% 128% 4 Beds Male 15% -19% -6% -5 Beds Female 86% -16% 60% 3 Beds Hispanic 73% -36% 13% 2 Beds Non-Hispanic 21% -23% -6% -4 Beds White 18% -13% 4% 3 Beds Black 62% -62% -37% -8 Beds Other 133% -25% 79% 4 Beds NA 0% -78% -78% -0 Beds Shakopee 63% -50% -17% -3 Beds Scott Co. 16% -30% -17% -5 Beds MN County 23% -2% 22% 8 Beds Out of State 65% -59% -32% -2 Beds NA 0% -60% -59% -0 Beds 7 The jail information system has one data element that combines information on ethnicity along with racial information. This analysis used the jail s data element to create two variables: ethnicity and race. 8 The accuracy of the Hispanic statistics is dependent on how assiduously the jail deputies record information on ethnicity. The analysis here is taking at face value what was recorded in the jail s computer system. 8

80 Youth have a higher involvement in crime than do older persons. However, youth demand for jail beds decreased between 2004 and 2009 in contrast to the increased demand originating from the middle-aged and senior inmates. The youth segment of the jail population dropped their demand for jail beds by -19% due to a one-third reduction in their jail stay between 2004 and Their jail stay declined from 11 days to 7 days. Both males and females experienced increases in their bookings, but the increase was more than five times higher for females than that found for males (85% versus 15%). Shorter stays for females and males mitigated the impact of these increased bookings on the demand for jail beds. The shorter stay for males generated a drop in demand for jail beds (down five beds or -19%). Despite the shorter stay for females, their very substantial increase in bookings created an increased demand for jail beds for three additional beds (a 60% increase). Despite the substantial increase in demand for jail beds among females, they still remain a distinct minority in the jail population. Hispanics increased their demand for jail beds by 13% (two jail beds). A very substantial increase in bookings (up 73%) was partially offset by a shortening in their stay (down -36%). Non-Hispanics experienced only a 21% increase in bookings and their shorter stay generated a decreased demand for jail beds by six percent (- 4 beds). Despite a very substantial increase in bookings (up 62%), Blacks were able to decrease their demand for jail beds due to a 62% decline in their jail stay that dropped from 23 days to 9 days. Whites and other racial groups experienced increased demands for jail beds (4% and 79% respectively). Increases in bookings drove this demand for more jail beds. Increased demand for jail beds revolved around Minnesota residents outside of Scott County. Increased bookings for this group drove up their demand for jail beds by 22% (eight beds). Although bookings were also up for residents of Scott County, these increased bookings were neutralized by shorter stays especially for residents of Shakopee (down 50%). Jail Bed Use Rates Figure 2 presents the jail bed use per 10,000 residents by age. As in Figure 1, the line column ( )represents the 2009 data and the dash (---) represents the 2004 value. The primary purpose of this graph is to show the powerful relationship between age and involvement in the criminal justice system; i.e., as people age, their involvement in the justice system declines. This holds for being a victim of crime to being arrested to being under correctional supervision. In Scott County, the jail bed demand rate in 2009 drops from 17 per 10,000 residents among young adults (under 35), to 10 per 10,000 residents for middle aged persons (35-49) and then descends to 3 per 10,000 residents for senior residents (50 or older). The rate for young adults decreased sharply between 2004 and 2009 (23 to 17 per 10,000 residents). Middleaged persons and senior citizens, on the other hand, experienced increases in their jail bed usage rate. The increase is especially notable for senior citizens where their jail usage rate climbed from one to three per ten thousand population. 9

81 Figure 2 Estimated 2004 & 2009 jail bed consuption rates per 10,000 resident population for Scott County by age group Rate per Age Number of 10,000 Group Jail Beds Used Population Population < Beds 28,049 31, Beds 30,199 32, plus 3 7 Beds 21,524 25, _ _ 0 Young Adults Middle Aged Seniors (Under 35) (35-49) (50 or older) 4. Processing Characteristics The jail s information system captures data on the number of times that a person has been booked into the jail. Nearly half of the persons (47%) booked into the jail have had no previous involvement with the jail and their jail stays tend to be short. Jail stays get longer as the number of bookings associated with the inmate increases. For example, persons who have had no prior bookings into the jail have an average stay of four days while persons who have more than ten bookings into the jail have an average stay of 23 days. Because of their longer stays, persons with extensive previous involvement with the jail are major consumers of the jail s bed space. The municipal police departments within Scott County generate two-thirds of the bookings into the jail (66%). Sheriff Deputies accounted for 17% of the jail s bookings and the State Highway Patrol initiated only four percent of the bookings. Bookings attributed to the Sheriff s Department experienced the longest stays in the jail (eight days) while those emanating from the Highway Patrol experienced the shortest stay (six days). Among the local police departments, Shakopee generates the largest number of bookings (28%). These Shakopee bookings, however, only average five days for their jail stay. Bookings attributed to the Savage Police Department, on the other hand, are half that of Shakopee (12% versus 28%), but these Savage bookings have an 10

82 average stay that is more than twice as long as that found for the Shakopee bookings (12 days versus five days). The jail stay for bookings associated with the Savage Police Department stands out because it is substantially longer than that found among all of the other police departments, including the Sheriff s Department and the Highway Patrol. Bookings from Shakopee and Savage consume the bulk of the jail s beds among the municipal law enforcement agencies (22% and 20% respectively). Table 6A Number of bookings, average jail stay and jail beds consumed by inmate jail processing characteristics Percent Percent Share of Average Jail Beds Share of Bookings Jail Stay Consumed Jail Beds Jail Bookings Total 100% 7 Days 90 Beds 100% No Priors 47% 4 Days 22 Beds 24% 1-3 Priors 39% 7 Days 32 Beds 36% 4-10 Priors 12% 20 Days 29 Beds 33% >10 Priors 2% 23 Days 7 Beds 7% Arresting Agency Sheriff 17% 8 Days 17 Beds 19% Local PD 66% 7 Days 55 Beds 61% State Hwy Patrol 4% 6 Days 3 Beds 3% NA 12% 10 Days 15 Beds 16% Local P.D. s Bookings Shakopee 28% 5 Days 20 Beds 22% Savage 12% 12 Days 18 Beds 20% Prior Lake 14% 7 Days 12 Beds 13% Belle Plaine 4% 7 Days 4 Beds 4% Other Muni PD 7% 2 Days 2 Beds 2% NA 34% 8 Days 35 Beds 39% Reason for leaving Bonded/Paid Fine 32% 2 Days 9 Beds 10% ROR 37% 2 Days 8 Beds 9% Served Term 13% 17 Days 28 Beds 31% Transfer 18% 20 Days 44 Beds 49% Other 1% 3 Days 0 Beds 0% Seven out of ten persons booked into the jail leave the jail by either making bond/paying a fine (32%) or being released on their own recognizance (37%). These persons have the shortest stays in the jail (two days for each group), so they are notable, but not dominant, consumers of the jail s beds (19% combined). Persons who served their sentence in the jail are few (13 percent of the bookings), but they have long stays (17 days). These sentenced inmates consume nearly one-third of the jail s beds (31%). Persons who are transferred to another agency consume nearly half of the jail s beds (49%). These transfers would include persons who are sentenced to the Minnesota Department of Corrections as well as those sent to another county where there are outstanding matters pending. 9 The high jail bed consumption generated by transfers is largely due to their long jail stay (20 days). Persons whose cases result in a prison term can take a 9 It would have been more informative to have the breakout between those persons being transferred to the Department of Corrections versus those being transferred to another agency. This should be addressed in the jail information system the next time the information system is updated. 11

83 long time to process and they contribute to this long average jail stay. Nevertheless, based on analyses conducted in other counties across the United States, there are also long stays associated with persons who are transferred to another jurisdiction due to outstanding warrants and/or other criminal justice matters. 10 Trends Persons with no prior bookings into the jail grew substantially (up 71%). This growth in jail neophytes, however, had only a minor impact on the demand for jail beds (up 14%) due to the shortening in the stay associated with these persons. Their jail stay shrunk from six days to four days. The number of persons with one to three prior bookings into the jail also increased, but at a much more moderate pace (38%) than that found among those with no prior bookings. These inmates had their stay cut by a third (-35%), from 10 days to seven days. This shorter stay reduced demand by three jail beds between 2004 and Table 6B Changes in bookings, average stay and jail beds consumed by inmate jail processing characteristics C H A N G E: TO Jail Bed Bookings Jail Stay Demand Jail Beds Total 28% -25% -2% -2 Beds Jail Bookings No Priors 71% -34% 14% 3 Beds 1-3 Priors 38% -35% -9% -3 Beds 4-10 Priors -30% 81% 29% 7 Beds >10 Priors -60% 13% -55% -8 Beds Arresting Agency Sheriff -19% -29% -42% -12 Beds Local PD 32% -23% 3% 2 Beds State Hwy Patrol -46% -44% -69% -6 Beds NA 8400% 915% 87663% 15 Beds Local P.D. s Bookings Shakopee 73% -38% 10% 2 Beds Savage 37% 9% 52% 6 Beds Prior Lake 67% -53% -20% -3 Beds BellePlaine -41% 44% -13% -1 Beds Other Muni PD -20% -51% -61% -3 Beds NA 21% -26% -9% -3 Beds Reason for leaving Bonded/Paid Fine 14% -16% -2% -0 Beds ROR 56% -13% 37% 2 Beds Served Term 22% -35% -20% -7 Beds Transfer 23% -14% 8% 3 Beds Other -55% -17% -62% -0 Beds The more substantive changes in jail bed demand revolved around those with more than four prior bookings into the jail. Bookings were down substantially for persons with 4 to 10 prior bookings as well as for those with more than 10 prior bookings (-30% and -60% respectively). Both of these groups also experienced longer jail stays, 10 Unfortunately, the jail information system does not distinguish between those persons transferred to MN DOC from those sent to another county. Remember that contract inmates are not included in this analysis. 12

84 but the lengthening in the jail stay was more pronounced for those with 4 to 10 prior bookings (up 81%) than that experienced by those with more than 10 prior bookings (up only 13%). Because of this much longer increase in jail stay for those with 4 to 10 prior bookings, their demand for jail beds went up by seven jail beds. Those with more than 10 prior bookings, on the other hand, decreased their demand by eight jail beds due to fewer bookings. Bookings by all of the local police agencies in the county are up (32%), but the average jail stays associated with these bookings decreased substantially (-32%). These shorter stays mitigated the impact of the increased bookings on the demand for jail beds (up 3%). For example, bookings attributed to the Shakopee Police Department increased 63% but the average stay associated with their bookings was cut in half (-50%). This shorter jail stay mitigated the impact of increased bookings on the demand for jail beds (up only by two beds). There was a much higher increase in jail beds demand for bookings associated with the Savage Police Department (up 50%) where the increase in bookings (up 37%) was enhanced by an increase in jail stay (up 9%). Bookings associated with the Sheriff s Department not only decreased in number (down -19%), but also experienced much shorter stays (down -29%). The decrease in bookings resulted in needing 12 fewer jail beds in 2009 than required in The one component among arresting agencies that showed an increase in the demand for jail beds (up 15 beds) involved those bookings where the arresting agency was not ascertained. The number of bookings where the arresting agency was not ascertained grew from only one in 2004 to 85 in This finding is difficult to interpret because there may be an issue with staff who are coding the data or there may be a change in the process for identifying arresting agencies. For example, persons sent to jail from the court may have been previously scored as being arrested by the Sheriff, but are now scored as not ascertained. Local officials should research this matter. There were increased bookings for persons who bonded out/paid a fine (up 14%), but especially for those who were released on their own recognizance (ROR) (up 56%). Despite these increased bookings, there was a negligible change in the demand for jail beds with these two groups because of the shortening in their jail stays. There was a 22% increase among persons who served their jail term. This increase, however, was neutralized by the dramatic decrease in their jail stays (down -35%). Consequently, sentenced inmates reduced their demands on the jail by 7 beds in this time period. Transfers, on the other hand, increased their demand for jail beds (up three beds). Increased bookings (up 23%) drove this increased demand. 5. Charge Characteristics Inmates with more than one charge pose complications for case processing: as the number of charges increases so does the inmate s stay in the jail. Persons booked into the jail with only one charge have an average jail stay of three days while those with three or more charges have an average stay of 17 days. While persons booked into the jail on a single charge comprise more than half of the jail s total bookings (58%), their short stay has them consuming only one-quarter (24%) of the jail s beds. Persons booked on three or more charges, on the other hand, comprise only 18% of all the bookings into the jail but their longer stay has them consuming 42% of the jail s beds. As would be expected, this relationship between the number of charges and the length of jail stay persists with felony charges. For example, a person with a single felony charge has an average jail stay of five days while a person the three or more felony charges has an average jail stay of 33 days. The jail information system has a program to identify the top charge associated with each booking and places that charge first among the charges associated with the person being booked. The analysis of the charge associated with each booking is based on the top charge as identified in the jail s computer system. There are numerous top charges associated with the jail s bookings. These charges are too numerous for a comprehensible analysis. Consequently, the various top charges were compressed into eight offense categories 13

85 to facilitate the analysis here. Attachment B to this report details each of the specific charges that comprise each of these eight categories. The eight categories, with brief descriptions, are as follows: Person Murder, assault, sexual assault, robbery Burglary/Theft Burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft Property Trespass, forgery, fraud, vandalism, malicious mischief, stolen property Drugs Possession, manufacturing, sales (no drug paraphernalia violations) Traffic Drunk driving; no: license, insurance, registration; other traffic violations Non-Comply Failure to appear, Probation/parole violations, bench warrants, etc. Public Order Public Intoxication, liquor law violations, disorderly conduct Other Resisting arrest, drug paraphernalia, fail to ID, etc.. There are two offense categories that are notable in their demand for jail beds: crimes against the person and motor vehicle violations. Inmates charged with crimes against the person made up 12% of the bookings into the jail but they had an above average stay of 14 days. Most of the charges comprising the Person category involved misdemeanor assaults. These inmates consumed nearly one-quarter of the jail s beds (24%). Motor vehicle traffic offenders, on the other hand, comprised nearly half of the bookings into the jail (46%), but their demand for jail beds was mitigated by their short stay (four days). The vast majority of the motor vehicle offenses involved drunk driving charges. Traffic offenders consumed nearly one-quarter of the jails beds (23%). Table 7A Number of bookings, average jail stay and jail beds consumed by booking charge characteristics Percent Percent Share of Average Jail Beds Share of Bookings Jail Stay Consumed Jail Beds Total 100% 7 Days 90 Beds 100% Single Charge 58% 3 Days 21 Beds 24% Two Charges 25% 10 Days 31 Beds 34% Three plus 18% 17 Days 38 Beds 42% No felonies 76% 4 Days 42 Beds 46% One felony 13% 5 Days 8 Beds 9% 2-3 felonies 8% 26 Days 27 Beds 30% 4 or more 3% 33 Days 13 Beds 14% Person 12% 14 Days 22 Beds 24% Burg/theft 5% 16 Days 9 Beds 11% Property 6% 9 Days 6 Beds 7% Drugs 7% 13 Days 11 Beds 13% Traffic 46% 4 Days 21 Beds 23% Non-Comply 13% 7 Days 12 Beds 14% Public Order 5% 3 Days 2 Beds 2% Other 6% 8 Days 6 Beds 7% Felony 24% 16 Days 48 Beds 54% Gross Misd 20% 9 Days 22 Beds 25% Misdemeanor 54% 3 Days 18 Beds 20% NA 2% 9 Days 2 Beds 2% Two other offense categories have relatively few bookings but experience above average jail stays. These categories are: drugs and burglary/theft. Seven percent of all bookings involved drug charges whose average 14

86 stay is 13 days. The vast majority of drug charges involve drug possession. Persons charged with burglary/theft comprise 5% of all bookings into the jail and their average stay is 16 days. The vast majority of the burglary/theft charges involve petty theft. Bookings involving drug charges consume 13% of the jail s beds while bookings involving burglary/theft consume 11% of the jail s beds. One offense category was designated as Non-Comply. This category includes only those persons who entered the jail on a bench warrant, a hold from another jurisdiction or probation/parole violations where the underlying charge was not recorded. The vast majority of the bookings involving non-comply charges involves persons who failed to appear (FTA). Thirteen percent of the persons booked into the jail had a non-comply charge. The top charge for one-quarter of the bookings (24%) involved a felony charge that incurred an average stay of 16 days. Those inmates with a felony charge experienced an average stay that was more than twice as long as the overall average (16 days versus 7 days). While relatively few bookings involved felony charges, the longer jail stay associated with felony charges made these inmates the dominant consumer of the jail s bed space (54% of the jail s beds). As expected, bookings involving misdemeanors have shorter jail stays than those involving felonies. The average jail stay for gross misdemeanors is nine days and only three days for plain misdemeanors. Although more than half of the bookings involve plain misdemeanors (54%), their short stay has them consuming only one-fifth of the jail s beds (20%). Trends Table 7B Changes in bookings, average stay and jail beds consumed by booking charge characteristics C H A N G E: TO Jail Bed Bookings Jail Stay Demand Jail Beds Total 28% -25% -2% -2 Beds Single Charge 10% -43% -36% -12 Beds Two Charges 50% 7% 64% 12 Beds Three plus 93% -51% -4% -1 Beds No felonies 20% -11% 9% 3 Beds One felony 40% -64% -49% -8 Beds 2-3 felonies 55% 17% 85% 12 Beds 4 or more 360% -88% -43% -10 Beds Person 64% -52% -21% -6 Beds Burg/theft 119% 5% 134% 5 Beds Property 413% 431% 2668% 6 Beds Drugs 170% 60% 341% 9 Beds Traffic 89% -49% -2% -0 Beds Non-Comply -64% 10% -59% -18 Beds Public Order 660% -9% 605% 1 Beds Other 105% -48% 7% 0 Beds Felony 59% -44% -10% -5 Beds Gross Misd 25% 35% 72% 9 Beds Misdemeanor 15% -41% -31% -8 Beds 15

87 There was a minor change in the number of bookings involving a single charge between 2004 and 2009 (up 10%). Nonetheless, inmates with a single charge drove the drop in the demand for jail beds between 2004 and Their jail stay was nearly halved, declining from five days to three days in this time period. This shorter jail stay reduced jail bed demand by 12 beds. Conversely, bookings involving two charges showed a substantial increase in the demand for jail beds. This substantial increase in bookings (up 50%) was further enhanced by a slight increase in jail stay to generate the need for an additional 12 jail beds between 2004 and 2009 for this group. Offenses against the person and especially non-compliance related charges spearheaded the decreased demand for beds. Offenses against the person required six fewer beds in 2009 than they did in This drop in demand occurred despite a sizeable increase in bookings (up 64%). The length of stay associated with offenses against the person was halved from 30 days in 2004 to 14 days in This much shorter stay generated the decrease in demand for jail beds for this group. Bookings involving non-compliance charges decreased substantially (down -64%) with only a modest increase in jail stay (up 10%). 11 Their demand for jail beds dropped -59% (down 18 jail beds). Bookings involving traffic related offenses nearly doubled (up 89%). This large increase in bookings was offset by the halving of the jail stay associated with these offenses. These two divergent trends cancelled each other out resulting in no change in the demand for jail beds. Three offense categories showed notable increases in jail bed demand: burglary/theft (5 beds); other property (6 beds); and drugs (9 beds). The increased demand for jail beds for burglary/theft offenders was driven by a doubling in bookings. A quintupling in both bookings (up 413%) and length of stay (431%) drove the increased demand for jail beds for other property offenses. With drug offenders, bookings went up 154% and their average stay grew from 8 days to 13 days (up 60%). Jail bed demand increased among those persons charged with gross misdemeanors (up nine beds) while demand fell among those charges with felonies (down five beds) and simple misdemeanors (down eight beds). All three classes of offenses incurred increases in their bookings but they experienced diverse patterns with regard to their jail stays. While the jail stays for felons and misdemeanants decreased (-44% and -41% respectively), jail stays for gross misdemeanants went up by a third (35%). 6. Additional Analysis Having this type of database with information on the number of jail inmates and their length of stay and building on it as time progresses offers a valuable resource for understanding the demand for jail space and being able to forecast future bed space needs and to monitor changes in the jail population that may be attributable to policy and program initiatives being undertaken in the Scott County justice system. With a larger database cross tabulations can be performed that examine two or more variables, such as age and type of crime. When issues are identified (such as the changes occurring in the use of jail beds among nonfelons), the larger database affords the opportunity to identify specific persons associated with those issues and makes the task of gathering additional information on them manageable. There is, for example, the ability to examine those persons who experience multiple bookings into the jail. What brings these people back to the jail over and over again? What factors drive up their jail stays? Information on these topics may help officials design programs to intervene with these people so as to mitigate their impact not only on the jail, but the rest of the justice system as well. 11 Much of the drop in non-compliance charges involved failure to appear (FTA) related charges. 16

88 Attachment A Codebook for Scott County (MN) 2004 & 2009 Jail Files NIC Variable Name Variable Description Variable Coding 1 Sequid Line number from original file 2 Year Year of data file Select Status of inmates in analysis 1 Scott County Adult Inmate (in) 2 Contract adult inmate (out) 3 Scott County Juvenile (out) 4 Contract Juvenile (out) 5 Electronic Home detention (out) 4 LOS Inmate's length of stay In days 5 LOSCode Code for jail stay 1 Less than 3 days days days days 5 91 days or more 6 BookCode Coding for prior bookings 1 No Priors 2 1 to 3 prior bookings prior bookings 4 More than 10 prior bookings 7 Bookings Number of prior bookings 8 Age Age when leaving the jail In years 9 AgeCode Coding of inmate's age 1 Under or older 10 Sex$ Inmate's Sex M Male F Female 11 Ethnic Hispanic Ethnicity of inmate 1 Hispanic (A,B,H,M) 2 Non-Hispanic 12 Race Inmate's Race 1 White (W,H) 2 Black (B,N,Y) 3 Other (A,I,M) 9 Not Ascertained (U) 13 Reside Inmate's place of residence 1 Shakopee 3 Scott County 4 Other MN county 5 Out of State 9 Not Ascertained 14 City$ Inmate's city of residence 17

89 NIC Variable Name Variable Description Variable Coding 15 ArrAgen Arresting agency 1 Scott County Sheriff's Dept 2 Scott County Muni PD 3 Dakota County Sheriff's Dept 4 Other MN County Sheriff's Dept 5 State Highway Patrol 9 Not Applicable 16 ArrMuni Arresting municipality 1 Belle Plain 2 Jordan, New Prague,Elko-New Market 3 Shakopee 4 Savage 5 Prior Lake 9 Not applicable 17 RelType Recode of Reason for leaving 1 Bonded out / Paid Fine 2 ROR 3 Served term 5 Transfer other agency (incl DOC) 6 Other (including weekenders) 18 NoChgs Coding for Number of charges 1 One 2 Two 3 Three or more 19 NoFels Coding for Number of felonies 1 None 2 One More than 3 (Max=8) 20 NICTOC NIC offense classification code 1 Person 2 Burglary/theft 3 Property (includes fraud, bad checks) 4 Drugs 5 MV Traffic 6 Non-compliance 7 Public Order 8 Other 21 Level Charge level 1 Felony 2 Gross Misdemeanor 3 Misdemeanor 4 Other 9 Not Ascertained 22 Cite$ Abbreviated MN Penal Code Cite 23 OffDesc$ English description of offense 18

90 ATTACHMENT B Profile of Top Charge for persons booked into the Scott County Jail January/February in the years 2004 and 2009 Only adults (includes contracts and EHD) NIC Offense code Cite Offence Description Count Count Total Murder Murder Manslaughter Assault Assault Assault Assault Assault Assault Domestic Assault Domestic Assault Assault Assault Aggravated Robery Sexual Assault Sexual Assault Sexual Assault Sexual Assault Child Abuse Terroristic Threat Stalking Harrassment Harrassment Child Neglect 1 Total Person Theft Theft Burglary Burglary Burglary 4 6 Total Burglary/Theft Forgery Trespass Fraud Property Damage Fraud Property Damage Issue Bad Checks Property Damage Possess Stolen Property Fraud ID Theft Fraud Forgery Tamper with Motor Vehicle 1 1 Total Other Property

91 NIC Offense code Cite Offence Description Count Count Drugs Drug Sale Drug Possession Drug Sale Drug Possession Drug Possession Drugs Drugs Drugs Drugs Drug Sale Drugs 1 Total Drugs Driving under restriction Driving after Cancellation Driving under drug influ Driving under suspension A-20 Drunk Driving (DWI) Other Traffic Accident No Insurance Traffic Violation Driving after Cancellation A-33 Drink in vehicle Careless driving Revoked Registration Other No License Other No Insurance Other Other Speeding Other 1 Total MV Traffic Fail to Register (Sex Off) B-01 Violate restraining order Contempt of court Probation Violation Failure to appear Violate restraining order Extradition Parole Violation Contempt of court Violate Court Order 2 Total Non-Compliance A-503 Underage drinking Disturb the Peace Disturb the Peace 2 Total Public Order

92 NIC Offense code Cite Offence Description Count Count Conservation violation Animal Cruelty Non-Support Escape Flee Officer Aid Escape Obstruction False Report False Name Obstruct Firemen Possess Shoplifting Gear Arson Possess Burglar Tools Gambling Weapon Violation Tamper Alarm Obscenity Weapon Violation Other No Dog License Animal Nuisance Hold - Witness Other 1 3 Total Other

93 Attachment C Case Counts for the Scott County (MN) Jail files (Jan./Feb: 2004 & 2009) Bookings Bookings Jail Bed Days Length of Stay Jail beds consumed A Total % % 5,495 5,298 9 Days 7 Days 92 Beds 90 Beds <3 days % % Day 1 Day 8 Beds 11 Beds 3-7 days % % Days 4 Days 8 Beds 11 Beds 8-30 days 53 9% 58 8% Days 16 Days 16 Beds 16 Beds days 24 4% 16 2% 1, Days 50 Days 20 Beds 14 Beds >90 days 9 2% 14 2% 2,381 2, Days 162 Days 40 Beds 39 Beds No Priors % % 1,138 1,278 6 Days 4 Days 19 Beds 22 Beds 1-3 Priors % % 2,124 1, Days 7 Days 35 Beds 32 Beds 4-10 Priors % 86 12% 1,365 1, Days 20 Days 23 Beds 29 Beds >10 Priors 43 7% 17 2% Days 23 Days 14 Beds 7 Beds % % 3,857 3, Days 7 Days 64 Beds 52 Beds % % 1,462 1,816 8 Days 8 Days 24 Beds 31 Beds 50 plus 30 5% 61 8% Days 6 Days 3 Beds 7 Beds Male % % 5,177 4, Days 9 Days 86 Beds 81 Beds Female % % Days 2 Days 5 Beds 8 Beds Hispanic 78 13% % 1,142 1, Days 9 Days 19 Beds 21 Beds Non-Hispanic % % 4,353 4,031 9 Days 7 Days 73 Beds 68 Beds White % % 3,780 3,882 8 Days 7 Days 63 Beds 66 Beds Black 60 10% 97 13% 1, Days 9 Days 23 Beds 14 Beds Other 27 5% 63 8% Days 9 Days 5 Beds 9 Beds NA 4 1% 4 1% Days 1 Days 0 Beds 0 Beds Shakopee 79 14% % Days 6 Days 17 Beds 14 Beds Scott Co % % 1,850 1, Days 7 Days 31 Beds 25 Beds MN County % % 2,269 2,729 8 Days 8 Days 38 Beds 46 Beds Out of State 26 4% 43 6% Days 6 Days 6 Beds 4 Beds NA 2 0% 2 0% Days 2 Days 0 Beds 0 Beds Sheriff % % 1,787 1, Days 8 Days 30 Beds 17 Beds Local PD % % 3,196 3,235 9 Days 7 Days 53 Beds 55 Beds State Hwy Patro 48 8% 26 4% Days 6 Days 8 Beds 3 Beds NA 1 0% 85 11% Day 10 Days 0 Beds 15 Beds Shakopee % % 1,074 1,157 9 Days 5 Days 18 Beds 20 Beds Savage 65 11% 89 12% 699 1, Days 12 Days 12 Beds 18 Beds Prior Lake 61 11% % Days 7 Days 15 Beds 12 Beds BellePlaine 54 9% 32 4% Days 7 Days 4 Beds 4 Beds Other Muni PD 69 12% 55 7% Days 2 Days 4 Beds 2 Beds NA % % 2,299 2, Days 8 Days 38 Beds 35 Beds Bonded/Paid Fin % % Days 2 Days 10 Beds 9 Beds ROR % % Days 2 Days 6 Beds 8 Beds Served Term 78 13% 95 13% 2,082 1, Days 17 Days 35 Beds 28 Beds Transfer % % 2,429 2, Days 20 Days 40 Beds 44 Beds Other 11 2% 5 1% Days 3 Days 1 Beds 0 Beds Single Charge % % 2,021 1,265 5 Days 3 Days 34 Beds 21 Beds Two Charges % % 1,122 1,807 9 Days 10 Days 19 Beds 31 Beds Three plus 68 12% % 2,352 2, Days 17 Days 39 Beds 38 Beds No felonies % % 2,293 2,454 5 Days 4 Days 38 Beds 42 Beds One felony 68 12% 95 13% Days 5 Days 16 Beds 8 Beds 2-3 felonies 40 7% 62 8% 872 1, Days 26 Days 15 Beds 27 Beds 4 or more 5 1% 23 3% 1, Days 33 Days 23 Beds 13 Beds 22

94 Attachment C (continued) Case Counts for the Scott County (MN) Jail files (Jan./Feb: 2004 & 2009) Bookings Bookings Jail Bed Days Length of Stay Jail beds consumed A Total % % 5,495 5,298 9 Days 7 Days 92 Beds 90 Beds Person 56 10% 92 12% 1,652 1, Days 14 Days 28 Beds 22 Beds Burg/theft 16 3% 35 5% Days 16 Days 4 Beds 9 Beds Property 8 1% 41 6% Days 9 Days 0 Beds 6 Beds Drugs 20 3% 54 7% Days 13 Days 3 Beds 11 Beds Traffic % % 1,268 1,218 7 Days 4 Days 21 Beds 21 Beds Non-Comply % 99 13% 1, Days 7 Days 30 Beds 12 Beds Public Order 5 1% 38 5% Days 3 Days 0 Beds 2 Beds Other 22 4% 45 6% Days 8 Days 6 Beds 6 Beds Felony % % 3,202 2, Days 16 Days 53 Beds 48 Beds Gross Misd % % 775 1,309 6 Days 9 Days 13 Beds 22 Beds Misdemeanor % % 1,518 1,036 4 Days 3 Days 25 Beds 18 Beds NA 0 0% 13 2% NA 8 Days 0 Beds 2 Beds 23

95 Appendix F Scott County Criminal Justice Trends Analysis Prepared by Therese McCoy May 2009 <<F -1>>

96 <<F -2>>

97 SCOTT COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS ANALYSIS Crime Trend Indicator Summary Table 1 Summary For the purpose of this analysis the comparisons are for the average annual percent difference for the crime indicators from 2003 to Scott County s resident population grew substantially in the four year period of 2003 to The age group with the highest criminal justice involvement (18 to 29 years of age) and the group with the lowest criminal justice involvement (50 or older) were the high growth segments of the population. However, the rate of increase in crime fell below the rate of the increase in the county s population; consequently, the county s crime rate per 10,000 people actually decreased over this time period. The annual average for Adult arrests grew at a much faster pace than those found for increases in reported crime. District Court case filings, however, experienced lower growth than that found for adult arrest activity. The growth in felony sentences was consistent with the growth in total District Court filings. Correctional populations experienced the highest growth among the criminal justice indicators under review. The growth in the jail population was higher than the growth in the community corrections caseload. Offender behavior is an important driver of the demand for justice services, but it is not the sole driver. Equally important for understanding the demand for justice services is how the justice system responds to those with whom it comes in contact. Population Growth Table 2 Overall, Scott County s population is projected to increase at an annual average rate of 6 percent between 2000 and That rate slows to 3 percent average annual growth for The age group with the highest criminal justice rate (18 29) grew at a slightly higher rate for But the growth for this age group is expected to slow to 3 percent annual average by The fifty and over age group had a 7 percent annual average growth rate for This age group is projected to increase at a 6 percent annual average through 2020, becoming our fastest growing segment of the population. Scott County is growing at a faster rate than Minnesota. The State had a modest overall increase of 1 percent annual average for This rate is expected to continue through The age groups also increased at an annual rate of 1 percent. By 2010, this rate is expected to fall to less than one half percent. Similar to Scott County, the age group for 50 and over is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate than all others. <<F -3>>

98 Crime Trends Table 3 Generally, Scott County s crime rate increased at an annual average rate of 5 percent between 2003 and Part I crimes increased at a slightly lower rate (4 percent) and Part II at the same rate of 5 percent. Part I crimes are considered more serious and include: murder, rape, aggravated robbery, aggravated assault, (person offenses), larceny burglary and motor vehicle theft (property offenses). Part II crimes are considered less serious, and include a wide range of offenses from simple assault and stolen property to drug and alcohol violations. In reporting out the subgroups, certain offenses are grouped. The category Other Assaults includes offenses against the family and other sex offenses. Other Property includes forgery, fraud, embezzlement, stolen property and vandalism. Public Order includes prostitution, gambling, liquor law violations, disorderly conduct, and vagrancy. Several crimes grew at a higher pace than overall crime. Drugs grew 7 percent and DUI grew 16 percent on an annual average. For Part I crimes, person offenses increased by an average annual 17 percent. However, the raw numbers in this area are so small that a slight increase in incidents can have a significant impact on the percentage increase. In Part I crimes, property offenses increased by an average annual 4 percent. In contrast, Minnesota s crime decreased ( 2 percent) on an annual average during this time period. Part I crimes were down less than 1 percent while Part II were down 4 percent. Although overall Part I crimes were down, like Scott County Person crimes were up slightly by 3 percent annually. Incidences for DUI were up 4 percent statewide. Adult Arrest Rates Table 4 Adult arrest was up 10 percent average annual, with the most activity for Part II crimes. Like overall arrests, Part II arrests were up 10 percent on an average annual increase. Part I crimes were up 8 percent for the time period. Arrests increased at higher percent than overall reported crime during this period (5 percent vs. 10 percent). Minnesota arrests were up an annual average of 3 percent per year. The arrest for Part I was up 4 percent, while Part II was at an annual increase of 3 percent. Like Scott County, the state annual average percent increases for adult arrests were higher than the average annual percent increase for reported crime ( 2 percent vs. 3 percent). District Court Criminal Filings Table 5 Scott County s overall average annual filings for both major and minor criminal matters were 6 percent. Major Criminal Matters include: serious felony, felony DUI, other felony, gross misdemeanor DUI and other gross misdemeanors. Minor Criminal Matters include: simple assaults, misdemeanor DUI and other non traffic misdemeanors. The greatest activity for average annual change was in the Major Criminal filings (10 percent). Within this area, two categories had significant increases, felony (12 percent) and gross misdemeanor DUI (13 <<F -4>>

99 percent). Filings for Minor Criminal matters increased on an annual average of only 2 percent. Within this category, DUI filings increased at a rate of 13 percent and other non traffic misdemeanors 7 percent on an annual average. Filings for misdemeanor assaults decreased annual average of 7 percent. Scott County s trend did not follow the statewide trend. Where overall filings were up in Scott County, the State experienced annual average percent decrease of 2 percent. The State experienced a slight increase in Major Criminal filings (3 percent) with the greatest activity was in Gross Misdemeanor DUI (7 percent). Felony and other gross misdemeanor filings had a slight increase (2 percent). Minor Criminal findings decreased at an annual average of 3 percent. Filings for misdemeanor DUI was up 6 percent and misdemeanor assault was down 1 percent. Felony Sentences Table 6 The number of people sentenced for a felony in Scott County was up slightly (6 percent). The percentage who received incarceration as part of the sentenced remained at about 89 percent. Use of local jail was up 3 percent annually, and the use of state prison as a sanction was up 7 percent annually. Again, these numbers are very small and are not necessarily indicative of a trend. The state had an average annual change of 3 percent for felony sentences. The use of local incarceration and state prison was fairly consistent with Scott County s use. Local incarceration was up 4 percent on an annual average, while state prison use increased at 2 percent annually. The percent of felons receiving incarceration as a sanction was about 90 percent. Annual Booking, Length of Stay and Average Daily Population in the Jail Table 7 In 2003, Scott County had a Rated Bed Capacity of 128 beds. When the new jail opened in December 2005, the rated bed capacity increased to 204. Over the five year period use (bookings), average length of stay (days an inmate stays in jail) and average daily population figures have increased. Bookings have increased an average annual rate of 7 percent. At the same time, average length of stay has increased 3 percent. This has had a 14 percent average annual impact on the average daily population. Community Corrections Table 8 Scott County entered the Community Corrections Act on July 1, Prior to that time, Scott County was a County Probation Office. The office handled all juvenile offenders, adult gross misdemeanor, and misdemeanor offenders. The Minnesota Department of Corrections supervised the felony offenders in the county. The caseloads reported for these offenders in reflect the numbers the Department of Corrections reported. Overall the caseload has had a 12 percent average annual increase. This increase has been consistent by level of offense, with felony, gross misdemeanor, and misdemeanor increasing at annual average of 12 percent each. Community Corrections screens cases for risk and assigns them to supervision based on that risk. For 2007 and 2008, there was little increase in this caseload size. The exception was the Probation Service Center and the Transfer out of County/State caseloads. Those offenders <<F -5>>

100 identified as low risk are assigned to the Probation Service Center. This caseload increased by 21 percent. The Transfer Out caseload is individuals from other counties or states whose supervision has been transferred to their residence. This caseload increased by 42 percent over the two year period. <<F -6>>

101 Indicator TABLE 1 CRIME TREND INDICATORS SUMMARY Scott County Average Annual Percent Change Subgroup Totals Average Annual Change State of Minnesota Average Annual Change Subgroup Totals Average Annual Change Pop % 1% Pop. with high crim. 7% 2% justice rates (18 29) Part I and Part II 5% 2% Reported Crime Part I 4% 0.6 Person 7% 3% Property 4% 0.9% Part II 5% 4% Adult Arrest 10% 3% Part I 8% 4% Part II 10% 3% Court Filing Total 8% 2% Major Criminal 10% 3% Minor Criminal 5% 3% Gross Misd DUI 13% 7% Misd DUI 12% 6% Felony Sentencing Total Sentenced 6% 3% Local Incarcerated 3% 4% State Incarceration 7% 2% Jail Operations Average Daily Popul. 14% Length of stay 3% Bookings 7% Comm. Corr. Total 12% Caseload Felony 13% Gross Misdemeanor 11% Misdemeanor 13% <<F -7>>

102 TABLE 2 POPULATION SCOTT COUNTY Scott County Average Annual % Change Average Annual % Change Total 89, , ,590 6% 3% ,052 42,783 58,606 4% 3% ,139 24,817 29,234 7% 2% ,147 32,760 29,234 5% 3% 50 and over 16,160 32,760 57,000 7% 6% Source: 2000 Censes Projections State of Minnesota TABLE 2 POPULATION STATE OF MINNESOTA Average Annual % Change Average Annual % Change Total 4,919,479 5,466,490 5,943,230 1% 1% ,286,894 1,301,547 1,408,590.1%.8% , , ,270 1%.4% ,541,741 1,519,670 1,563,210.1%.3% 50 and over 1,300,584 1,722,020 2,107,160 3% 2% Source: 2000 Censes Projections <<F -8>>

103 Part I & II Reported Crime Scott County TABLE 3 CRIME TRENDS SCOTT COUNTY Annual Average % Change Annual Average % Change for Subgroups Part I & II Total Reported Crime 9,955 11,984 5% Part I 2,641 3,095 4% Part I Person % Robbery % Agg. Assault % Part I Property % Burglary % Part II 9,955 11,984 5% Other Assaults % Other Property % Drugs % DUI % Public Order % Other % Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety, BCA Annual Uniform Crime Report <<F -9>>

104 Part I & II Total Reported Crime State of MN TABLE 3 CRIME TRENDS STATE OF MINNESOTA Annual Average Percent Change Annual Average Percent Change for Subgroups Part I & II Reported Crime 485, ,859 2% Part I 176, ,110.6% Part I Person 13,992 14,294 3% Robbery 3,991 4,769 5% Agg. Assault 7, % Part I Property 162, , % Part II 308, ,749 4% Other Assaults 50,314 50, % Other Property 96,214 82,002 4% Drugs 17,281 17, % DUI 28,661 33,277 4% Public Order 57,356 50,445 3% Other 54,668 47,431 4% Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety, BCA Uniform Crime Report <<F -10>>

105 Scott County Adult Arrest TABLE 4 ARREST RATES SCOTT COUNTY Average Annual Percent Change Total Arrest 4,163 6,042 10% Part I % Part II % Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety, BCA Uniform Crime Report State of Minnesota Adult Arrest TABLE 4 ARREST RATES STATE OF MINNESOTA Average Annual Percent Change Total Arrest 148, ,735 3% Part I 19,958 21,456 4% Part II 128, ,277 3% Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety, BCA Uniform Crime Report <<F -11>>

106 Scott County Criminal Filings TABLE 5 DISTRICT COURT FILINGS SCOTT COUNTY Average Annual Percent Change Total 2,320 2,934 6% Major Criminal Filings 1,084 1,599 10% Felony % GM DUI % Other GM % Minor Criminal Filings 1,236 1,335 2% 5 th Degree Assaults % Misd DUI % Non Traffic Misd % State of Minnesota Criminal Filings Source: Minnesota State Court, MNJAD TABLE 5 DISTRICT COURT FILINGS STATE OF MINNESOTA Average Annual Percent Change Total 322, ,890 2% Major Criminal Filings 57, % Felony 29,119 31,289 2% GM DUI 13,541 17,507 7% Other GM 15,025 16,482 2% Minor Criminal Filings 264, ,612 3% 5 th Degree Assaults 15,198 14,595 1% Misd DUI 27,117 34,657 6% Source: Minnesota State Court, MNJAD <<F -12>>

107 Scott County Sentenced Felons TABLE 6 FELONY SENTENCES SCOTT COUNTY Average Annual Percent Change Total % Sentenced to Local Incarceration Sentenced to State Prison % % State of Minnesota Sentenced Felons Source: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission TABLE 6 FELONY SENTENCES STATE OF MINNESOTA Average Annual Percent Change Total 14,492 16,168 3% Sentenced to Local Incarceration Sentenced to State Prison 9,557 10,970 4% 3,536 3,760 2% Source: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission <<F -13>>

108 TABLE 7 AVERAGE ANNUAL BOOKINGS, LENGTH OF STAY AND AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION SCOTT COUNTY Scott County Jail Average Annual Percent Change Bookings 4,184 5,534 7% Average Length of Stay 7 Days 8 Days 3% Average Daily Population 75 Inmates 125 Inmates 14% Rated Bed Capacity 128 Beds 204 Beds 12% Source: Scott County Sheriff s Office, Jail Division <<F -14>>

109 Community Corrections Caseload by Level of Offense TABLE 8 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS CASELOAD Average Annual Percent Change Total 2,066 3,297 12% Felony % Gross Misdemeanor % Misdemeanor 828 1,333 13% Source: Minnesota Department of Correction, Annual Probation Survey TABLE 8 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS SUPERVISION LEVEL Supervision Level Enhanced Supervision Sex Offender Supervision Alcohol and Drug Enhanced Supervision Traditional Supervision Med Risk Probation Reporting Center 1,818 2,204 Pending Transfer Out of County Cases Source: Scott County Community Corrections <<F -15>>

110 <<F -16>>

111 Appendix G Comparative Analysis of Criminal Justice Measures and Indicators: Scott County Compared to Five Other Minnesota Counties and Statewide Prepared by Therese McCoy May 2009 <<G -1>>

112 <<G -2>>

113 SCOTT COUNTY JUSTICE SYSTEM COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS FIVE COUNTY COMPARISONS CRIME TREND INDICATORS PER 10,000 Summary Crime Indicator Per 10,000 Table 1 For this comparison, the counties of Carver, Olmsted, Sherburne, Stearns, and Wright were selected. (These counties were selected because of their rate of growth and the mix of suburban and rural areas within their respective boundaries.) Scott County s overall crime rate was below both the five county and the statewide comparisons. The rate for Part II crimes, however, was above. Arrest rates were substantially above the five county and statewide comparisons with the most activity in Part II crimes. District Court Filings were below the two comparisons for criminal case filings. Scott County was only slightly below the five county comparison, but well below the statewide. Activity in the Minor Criminal filings statewide can be attributed to the difference in overall rates. The rate for the number of felony sentences was also below the 5 county and statewide comparisons. Scott County s rate for people under supervision with Community Corrections was substantially higher than the five county comparisons, with the highest rate for misdemeanor offenders. In addition, Scott had more people booked into the jail with longer periods of incarceration. Reported Crime Rates Per 10,000 Table 2 When comparing overall reported crime rate, Scott County was 39 percent higher than the average for the five counties and 8 percent higher than the statewide average. The Scott County Part I crime reported rate was 1 percent below the five county average rate, and 25 percent below the statewide average rate. The County s Part II Crime reported crime rate was 27 percent above the five county average rate and 61 percent above the statewide average rate. Compared to these two benchmarks, Scott County experienced less Part I crime and more Part II crimes reported to local law enforcement. Adult Arrest Rates Per 10,000 Table 3 Adult arrest rates were 72 percent above the five county average and 54 percent above the statewide average. Adult arrest rates for Part I Crimes were 31 percent below the five county average and 41 percent below the statewide average. In contrast, the Scott County adult arrest rates for Part II Crimes were significantly above the five county average by 88 percent and the statewide average by 60 percent. <<G -3>>

114 District Court Criminal Filings Rate Per 10,000 Table 4 Major Criminal Filings per 10,000 Major Criminal matters are defined as serious felony, felony DUI, other felony, gross misdemeanor DUI, and other gross misdemeanors by the Minnesota State Courts. Given the Scott County Part I reported crime rate, one would expect the major criminal filings to be about the same as the five county averages and about 25 percent below the state average. This is not the case. Scott County s rate is 12 percent above the five county average, and less than 1 percent under the statewide average. For major criminal dispositions, Scott County is disposing of 12 percent more cases than the five county average and keeping pace with the statewide average. Scott County also process more major criminal cases without a court or jury trial. Scott County was 30 percent below the five county averages and 46 percent the statewide average. For all major criminal matters all three, Scott County, five county comparison, and statewide processed 96 percent of the files with Court Action. Minor Criminal Filings per 10,000 Minor Criminal matters are defined as 5 th degree assault, misdemeanor DUI, and other non traffic misdemeanors by the Minnesota State Courts. Given Scott County s Part II reported crime and arrest rates, one would expect that minor criminal filings would be significantly above both the five county average and statewide. This is not the case. Scott County was 8 percent below the five county average and 24 percent below the statewide. For minor criminal dispositions, Scott County is 9 percent below the five county averages and 32 percent below the statewide average in disposing of cases. As with the case with major criminal matters, Scott County had significantly fewer jury and court trials. Scott County was 78 percent below the five county average and 77 percent below statewide. Felony Sentence Rates Per 10,000 Table 5 The County s rate for felony offenders sentenced during the year was 40 percent below the five county average and 47 percent above the statewide average. For rate of incarceration, Scott County was slightly below the five county average (1 percent) and 3 percent above statewide average. Scott County was 25 percent below the five county average and 34 percent below the statewide average in offenders receiving a state prison sentence. For offenders receiving a sentence for local incarceration, Scott County was 33 percent below the five county average and 40 percent below the statewide average. It should be noted that the numbers in this area are small that a slight increase in offenders can have a big impact on the percent. The rate for prison admissions was 27 percent below the 5 county comparison and 34% below the statewide. Offenders entering after a violation of Stayed Commitment were 17% below the rate for both 5 county and statewide. The raw numbers for prison is too low to make these numbers meaningful. Community Corrections Caseload Rate Per 10,000 Table 6 <<G -4>>

115 In comparing probation caseloads, Scott County was 55 percent higher than the five county average and 20 percent above the statewide average. When separated by level of offense, Scott County s felony rate was 16 percent above the five county average and 10 percent below the statewide. The rates moved up substantially for gross misdemeanors and misdemeanors. Scott County was 33 percent above the five county average and 27 percent above the average statewide rate. For misdemeanors that rate went up to 52 percent from the five county averages, and to 40 percent for the statewide average. Jail Activity Rate Per 10,000 Table 7 In this comparison, Sherburne County was excluded because the majority of the use was outside agency contract bed. Jail activity will be a four county comparison. Our county capacity was 16 percent above the four county comparison and 15 percent below the statewide average rate. This is not surprising, as Scott County opened a new 204 bed facility in December of 2005 and is the newest facility in the comparison group. Statewide, there has been significant building of jail bed capacity. Scott County s rate for Average Daily Population was 0.7 percent below the four county comparison and 20 percent below the statewide average rate. The Annual Admissions Rate (bookings) was 16 percent higher than the four county average and 5 percent higher than statewide average. The Estimated Length of Stay for Scott County was 35 days. This was 12 percent over the four county comparison and 31 percent over the statewide rate. <<G -5>>

116 Scott County Justice System Analysis Five County Comparison For 2007 For The Comparison, Scott County Used Carver, Olmsted, Sherburne And Wright Counties. Rates Are Based On Incidents Per 10,000 Inhabitants. TABLE 1 SUMMARY CRIME TREND INDICATORS PER 10,000 Crime Indicator Rate for Scott County Percentage Above or Below Five County Comparison Rate Percentage Above or Below State of MN Rate Total Reported Crime % Above 8% Above Part I Crime Rates 244 1% Below 25% Below Part II Rates % Above 27% Above Total Arrest Rates % Above 54% Above Part I Arrest Rates 27 31% Below 41% Below Part II Arrest Rates % Above 60% Above Criminal Court Filings 473 3% Below 19% Below Rates Major Criminal Filings % Above Less than 1% Below Minor Criminal Filings 347 8% Below 23% Below Felony Sentences Rates 16 40% Below 47% Below Rates for Felons 13 33% Below 40% Below Sentenced to local Incarceration Rates for Felons 5 25% Below 34% Below Sentenced to State Incarceration Community Corrections % Above 18% Above Caseload Rates Rate of Felony Offenders 71 16% Above 10% Below on Supervision Rate of Gross 84 33% Above 27% Above Misdemeanor Offenders on Supervision Rate of Misdemeanor % Above 40% Above offenders on 12/31/07 Rate of Admissions to 8 27% Below 34% Below State Prison in 2007 Rate of New 3 24% Below 36% Below Commitments Rate of Violation of 3 17% Below 17% Above Probation on a Stayed Commitment Rate of Violation of 2 40% Below 57% Below Supervised Release Jail Usage* Rate of Jail Capacity 16 Beds 16% Above 15% Below Rate for Average Daily Population 11 Less than 1% Below 20% Below <<G -6>>

117 Annual Admissions % Above 5% Above Estimated Length of Stay 39 Days 12% Above 31% Above * Due to the large volume of contract beds other agencies, Sherburne was removed. Jail data is 4 county comparisons <<G -7>>

118 Total Reported Crime Rates TABLE 2 REPORTED CRIME RATES PER 10,000 Part I Crime Rates Part I Person Crime Rates Part I Property Crime Rates Part II Crime Rates Five County State of MN Scott County Five County % Difference State of MN % Difference 39% 1% 7%.7% 61% 8% 25% 54% 22% 27% Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety, BCA Annual Uniform Crime Report TABLE 3 ADULT ARREST RATES PER 10,000 Total Adult Arrest Rates Part I Arrest Rates Part II Arrest Rates Five County State of MN Scott County Five County % Difference State of Minnesota % Difference 72% 31% 88% 54% 41% 60% Source: Minnesota Department of Public Safety, BCA Annual Uniform Crime Report <<G -8>>

119 Rates of Major Criminal Filings TABLE 4 DISTRICT COURT CRIMINAL FILING RATES PER 10,000 MAJOR CRIMINAL ACTIVITY Rates of Major Criminal Dispositions Major Criminal Percent of Cases Pending Percent of Major Criminal Cases Disposed by a Jury or Court Trial Percent of Major Criminal Cases Disposed with Court Action Five County % 3% 96% State of MN % 4% 96% Scott County % 2% 96% Five County % Difference 12% 12% 1% 30%.1% State of MN % Difference.1% 0% 21% 46% 0% Source: Minnesota State Courts, MNJAD Rate of Minor Criminal Filings TABLE 4B MINOR CRIMINAL ACTIVITY Rate of Minor Criminal Dispositions Minor Criminal Percent of Cases Pending Percent of Minor Criminal Cases Disposed by a Jury or Court Trial Percent of Minor Criminal Cases Disposed of with Court Action Five County % 2% 71% State of MN % 2% 63% Scott County %.3% 68% Five County % Difference State of MN % Difference 8% 9% 4% 77% 8% 24% 32% 8% 77% 32% Source: Minnesota State Courts, MNJAD <<G -9>>

120 Rate of Felony Offenders Sentenced in 2007 TABLE 5 FELONY SENTENCING RATES PER 10,000 Percent of Offenders Sentenced to Incarceration Rate of Offenders Sentenced to Local Incarceration Rate of Offenders Sentenced to State Incarceration Five County 28 93% 19 6 State of MN 31 89% 21 7 Scott County 16 92% 13 5 Five County % Difference State of MN % Difference 40% 1% 33% 25% 47% 3% 39% 33% Source: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission Offenders Admitted to a State Prison in 2007 TABLE 5B PRISON COMMITMENT RATE Offenders Entering as New Commitment Offenders Entering on Violation of Stayed Commitment Offenders Returning for Violation of Supervised Release Five County State of Minnesota Scott County Five County % Difference State of Minnesota % Difference 27% 24% 17% 40% 34% 36% 17% 57% <<G -10>>

121 TABLE 6 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS CASELOAD RATE PER 10,000 Offenders on Supervision Felony Offenders on Supervision Gross Misdemeanor Offenders on Supervision Misdemeanor Offenders on Supervision Five County State of MN Scott County Five County % Difference State of MN % Difference 55% 16% 33% 52% 18% 10% 27% 40% Source: Minnesota Department of Corrections, Annual Probation Survey TABLE 6B PERCENT OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS CASELOAD BY LEVEL OF OFFENSE Felony Percent of Caseload Gross Misdemeanor Percent of Caseload Misdemeanor Percent of Caseload Five County 40% 41% 44% State of Minnesota 36% 30% 34% Scott County 27% 32% 40% Five County % Difference State of Minnesota % Difference 31% 20% 9% 24% 8% 18% Source: Minnesota Department of Corrections <<G -11>>

122 Jail Bed Capacity Rate TABLE 7 JAIL ACTIVITY RATE PER 10,000 Average Daily Population Rate Annual Admissions Rate Estimated Length of Stay Five County 14 Beds State of MN 19 Beds Scott County 16 Beds Five County % Difference State of MN % Difference 16%.7% 16% 12% 15% 20% 5% 31% <<G -12>>

123 Appendix H Visual Aids Used During the Community Meeting <<H -1>>

124 <<H -2>>

125 012)3%42,)5%,,2$)6'%$-(7 82(9$%42:)412),%42)-;)%/<&::&-':!"#$%&'&'()*%&$)+,-./&'( 82(9$%42:),%42)-;)-9=$ %4)B%##2':)4-)412)@2A2$)-;)412)3%42,C) D'#94)E)42')(%$$-':)-;).%42,)#2,)<&'942 L-.M)31%4)B%##2':)4-)412)@2A2$)-;)412)3%42,C) D'#94)E)GN)(%$$-':)-;).%42,)#2,)<&'942 How many minutes will it take to fill the water barrel? I4%,4)!"2,J&:2).&41) 5%,,2$)B%$;)K9$$ I4%,4)!"2,J&:2).&41) 5%,,2$)B%$;)K9$$ F94#94)E)GH)(%$$-':)-;).%42,)#2,)<&'942 3 <<H - 3>> F94#94)E)GH)(%$$-':)-;).%42,)#2,)<&'942 4

126 D'#94)E)GH)(%$$-':)-;).%42,)#2,)<&'942 F'2)O-,2)0&<2P 32)B%A2)*9:4)D$$9:4,%42/)412)01,22)I4,%42(&2:);-,) O%'%(&'()*%&$)+,-./&'( I4%,4)!"2,J&:2).&41) 5%,,2$)B%$;)K9$$ 1.Build a Bigger Water Tank 2.Reduce the Rate of Admissions 3.Reduce Length of Inmate Stays in Jail F94#94)E)Q)(%$$-':)-;).%42,)#2,)<&' R27)O2%:9,2:)-;)K$9J49%?-'S O-'41$7)6T>),%'(2/);,-<)UVWQ)&'<%42:)4-)GVX)&'<%42:) 6A2,%(2)'9<Y2,)-;)%/<&4:),%'(2/);,-<)NQQ)4-)VZV)&'<%42:) 6A2,%(2)@2'(41)-;)I4%7)[6@I\),%'(2/);,-<)VWH)/%7:)4-)GHW])/%7:) Indicator Lowest Highest ADP 65.8 inmates in Dec inmates Sep 08 Admits 288 admits Feb admits in Oct 07 ALS 5.0 days in Mar days in Sep 08 I9<<%,7)-;)O-'41$7)6A2,%(2)B&(1) %'/)@-.)6T>);-,)0.2$A2)>2,&-/: )*%'9%,7)^H])01,-9(1)T2J2<Y2,)_HQ >2,&-/)))))T%42:))))))))))))))6T>)8%'(2))))))))))+1%'(2)&')52/)L22/ ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))0-4%$))))5--`))))6@I ))G))*%')^H])4-)I2#)_)H]))XQWU)4-)Q]WV)))a>))))))ZWb))))cQWX))))G]WU) ))N))I2#)^H])4-)T2J)^H]))Q]WV)4-)UVWQ)))TL))cGXWX))))cVWZ)))cGNW] ))] ))Z))6#,)^HZ)4-)FJ4)^HZ)))UXWH)4-)bQWU)))a>))))]GWU)))G]WN))))GQWZ ))V ))U )24J )))))*%')^H])4-)T2J)^HQ))XQWU)4-)GN]W]))a>))))ZZWX)))))QWb)))))]VWQ X 7 <<H - 4>> Q 8

127 I-<2)5%:&J)*%&$)>-#9$%?-') O%'%(2<2'4)K-,<9$%: Number of Jail Beds X 365 Days = Annual Bed Day Resource Jail Count Each Day x 365 days = Annual Bed Days Consumed 012)I2A2')R27)*9:?J2)I7:42<) T2J&:&-')>-&'4: Average Daily Population = Bed Days Consumed by # of Days in Period Annual Bed Days Consumed # of Bookings = Average Length of Jail Stay # of Jail Admissions X Average Length of Stay = Beds Required 9 10 I2A2')R27)*9:?J2)I7:42<)T2J&:&-':)T242,<&'2) 412)3-,`$-%/)%'/)+-:4)-;)%'7)*9:?J2)I7:42< 1. Decision to arrest 2. Decision to detain in jail on pre-trial detention T2J&:&-')4-)6,,2:4 3. Decision to release from pre-trial detention 4. Decision to prosecute 5. Adjudication outcome 6. Sentencing decision 7. Sentence modification decision 11 <<H - 5>> 12

128 T2'A2,)c)012)T2J&:&-')4-)T24%&' T2J&:&-')4-)T24%&')&') >,2c0,&%$)T242'?-' 0-4%$ 5--`2/ F,/2,2/)D' d)5--`2/ 6$$)6/9$4) XNd 6,,2:4: NHMZVZ GZMXZQ VMXHU >%,4)D)>2,:-') K2$-'7 >%,4)DD)>2,:-') O&:/W NMGQN GMXV] >%,4)DD)>,-#2,47) O&:/W ]XN ]XN H GHHd ZNb QHd ]VZ NUH bz X]d 0,%eJ)O&:/W ZXX GV] ]NZ ]Nd >9Y$&J)F,/2,) O&:/W NMQbX bzh GMbVX ]Nd K06)3%,,%'4 ZMUUb ZMUUb H GHHd T2J&:&-')4-)82$2%:2)K,-<) >,2c4,&%$)T242'?-' T2J&:&-')4-)>,-:2J <<H - 6>> 16

129 6/f9/&J%?-')F94J-<2 17 I2'42'J&'()T2J&:&-' 18 Fg2'/2,)+-:4)>2,)T%7M)57)I%'J?-' $1.33 $3.18 $5.65 $7.46 $7.00 $45.00 $65.00 $43.27 $46.46 $49.04 $.72 Case Bank Low Supervision Medium Supervision High Supervision Intensive Supervision Electronic Supervision Probation Center Local Jail Minimum Security Prison Medium Security Prison Max Security Prison Cost per Day 19 I2'42'J2)O-/&hJ%?-' 20 <<H - 7>>

130 I2A2')R27)*9:?J2)I7:42<)T2J&:&-':) T242,<&'2)412)3-,`$-%/)%'/)+-:4)-;)%'7) *9:?J2)I7:42< 1. Decision to arrest K$-.)T&%(,%<)-;)412)I2A2')R27)+*)I7:42<)T2J&:&-')>-&'4: 2. Decision to detain in jail in pre-trial detention 3. Decision to release from pre-trial detention 4. Decision to prosecute 5. Adjudication outcome 6. Sentencing decision 7. Sentence modification decision I2$2J42/)*9:?J2)D'/&J%4-,:)%4)R27)*9:?J2)I7:42<)T2J&:&-')>-&'4:S +-<#%,&:-')-;)8%42:)#2,)GHMHHH)>-#9$%?-').&41)I4%42)6A2,%(2 132% 132% Adults Under Correctional Supervision, in jail or on probation +-9'?2:)8%'`2/)Y7)+,&<2)8%42)%'/)+&47)i) +-9'47)#2,)+%#&4%)!"#2'/&49,2:);-,)*9:?J2! " 50% Jail Booking Rate 49% Felony Filings in Superior Court Rate 36% Felony Filings in Lower Court Rate 14% County Incarceration Rate 0% % State Wide Average % % Complaint Sought by Law Enforcement - 21% Adult Misdemeanor Arrest Rate - 23% Combined Adult Felony and Misdemeanor Arrest Rate High Crime Medium Crime Low Expenditures Medium Expenditures High Expenditures B&(1)+,&<2)) X)+-9'?2: O2/&9<)+,&<2)) U)+-9'?2: B&(1)+,&<2)) i O2/&9<)!"#2'/&49,2: U)+-9'?2: O2/&9<)+,&<2))) i) O2/&9<)!"#2'/&49,2: GH)+-9'?2: B&(1)+,&<2) i) B&(1)!"#2'/&49,2: U)J-9'?2: O2/&9<)+,&<2 )i B&(1)!"#2'/&49,2: Z)+-9'?2: - 30% Adult Felony Arrest Rate - 38% - 38% Serious Crime Rate Low i O2/&9<)!"#2'/&49,2: i B&(1)!"#2'/&49,2: b)+-9'?2: 23 <<H - 8>> 24

131 +-9'?2:)8%'`2/)Y7)+,&<2)8%42)%'/)+&47)i)+-9'47)#2,)+%#&4%)!"#2'/&49,2: C R I M E H I G H M E D I U I%')52,'%/&'-)))Q)))ZG I4%'&:$%9:))))))))))))b))ZV k9y%)))))))))))))))))))gn))vu R2,'))))))))))))))))))))G]))ZH O%,&#-:%))))))))))))GZ))ZZ O%/2,%)))))))))))))))GV))VQ 09$%,2)))))))))))))))))NG))VV B9<Y-$/4))))))))))NN))VH I9n2,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"#!!#" 0212<%))))))))))))))NX))ZU 59n2))))))))))))))))))]G))VX I%')52'&4-)))))))))]U))VG O!TDaO)!j>!LTD0a8! K,2:'-))))))))))))G))]U 8&A2,:&/2))))))))U))NN I%')T&2(-)))))GH))]] I-$%'-))))))))))Gb))NX k-$-))))))))))))))))))))nh))nz >$9<%:)))))))))))))))NU))]G O-'42,27))))))))))Nb))]X I%'4%)+,9o)))))))))]H))NV O2'/-J&'-))))))))))]N))NQ >$%J2,)))))))))))))))))]]))]V I1%:4%)))))))))))))))))]Z))N] I-'-<%))))))))))))))]V))NG!$)T-,%/-))))))))))]X))]Z I%'4%)5%,Y%,%)))]b))NH BDlB)!j>!LTD0a8! I%')*-%m9&')))))))))))Z))GQ I%J,%<2'4-)))))))))))V))GV 6$%<2/%))))))))))))))))X))))b +-'4,%)+-:4%)))))))GX))Gb F,%'(2)))))))))))))))))N]))GN 6$#&'2)))))))))))))))))))NZ))))G 0,&'&47)))))))))))))))))))NQ))))Q O-'-))))))))))))))))))))]Q))))Z 012)+,&<&'%$)*9:?J2)+--,/&'%?'() +-<<&n22 ))6J1&2A&'()J-<#,212':&A2)J,&<&'%$)))) f9:?j2)#$%''&'()%'/)j--,/&'%?-' L O W R&'(:))))))))))))))))ZH)))ZN +%$%A2,%:))))))))ZV)))Zb l$2''))))))))))))))zu)))zq 0-9$9<'2)))))))ZX))VZ I%')@9&:)FY)))))VG))Z] L2A%/%))))))))))))VN))ZX T2$)L-,42)))))))ZQ))]N L%#%)))))))))))))))VH))]H O-/-J))))))))))))VZ))]Q 6<%/-,))))))))))VU))]b p2'49,%))))))))))))))))))))zg))gx I%'4%)+$%,%)))))))))ZN))GH I%')O%42-)))))))))))))))Z])))GG +-$9:%))))))))))))))))))))))ZZ)))))V O%,&')))))))))))))))))))))))Zb)))GZ I&:`97-9))))))))))))))))))V])))G] D'7-))))))))))))))))))))))))))VQ)))))] >-$&J7M)>,-(,%<)%'/)F#2,%?-'%$)>$%''&'( 6')GGcI42#)l2'2,%$)>$%''&'()>,-J2::)O-/2$ Local criminal justice planning begins by analyzing problems and setting objectives # Policy Planning Establishes purposes (What should we do and why?) 1. Prepare for planning What should be done? 2. Describe present situation 3. Develop projections 4. Consider alternative futures It proceeds to defining strategies, and plans to achieve objectives # Program Planning Selects courses of action (What can we do and how?) 11. Monitor and evaluate progress What will be done? 5. Identify problems 6. Set Goals It then implements planning decisions, reviews program performance, and provides feedback for a new planning cycle # Operational Planning Allocates resources (What will we do and when?) 10. Implement plans 9. Plan for implementation 8. Select preferred alternative 7. Identify alternative courses of action!"#$%&#'%()%*+'), 27 <<H - 9>> 28

132 Government Location Planning Type Criminal Justice Agency Planning Coordinated City & County Criminal Justice Planning + + Local Comprehensive Criminal Justice Planning Government Location Planning Type Criminal Justice Agency Planning Coordinated City & County Criminal Justice Planning + + Local Comprehensive Criminal Justice Planning Policy Planning (What should we do and why?) Policy Planning (What should we do and why?) State and local statutes; Agency mission statement Program Planning (What can we do and how?) Program Planning (What can we do and how?) Program development; Manpower planning; Procedures manual Operational Planning (What will we do and when?) Operational Planning (What will we do and when?) Annual budget preparation; Project implementation Reactive Decisions (Putting out fires) Reactive Decisions (Putting out fires) Hastily prepared memo detailing plan to deal with unanticipated budget cut or Court decision #2:M)@-J%?-')i)!"%<#$2)>,-/9J4:)-;))+--,/&'%42/)+&47)i)+-9'47))>$%''&'( 07#2:M)@-J%?-')i)!"%<#$2)>,-/9J4:)-;))@-J%$)+-<#,212':&A2)+)*)>$%''&'( Government Location Planning Type Coordinated City & Criminal Justice County Criminal Agency Planning + Justice Planning + Local Comprehensive Criminal Justice Planning Government Location Planning Type Criminal Justice Agency Planning Coordinated City & County Criminal Justice Planning + + Local Comprehensive Criminal Justice Planning Policy Planning (What should we do and why?) State and local statutes; Agency mission statement Mayor s crime control platform; County public safety goals and objectives Policy Planning (What should we do and why?) State and local statutes; Agency mission statement Mayor s crime control platform; County public safety goals and objectives Executive order creating local planning unit; Joint powers agreements Program Planning (What can we do and how?) Program development; Manpower planning; Procedures manual Reorganization plan unifying county corrections agencies Program Planning (What can we do and how?) Program development; Manpower planning; Procedures manual Reorganization plan unifying county corrections agencies Correction facilities and information system master plans Operational Planning (What will we do and when?) Annual budget preparation; Project implementation Annual budget; Implementation schedules Operational Planning (What will we do and when?) Annual budget preparation; Project implementation Annual budget; Implementation schedules Annual action plan, schedules, budgets Reactive Decisions (Putting out fires) Hastily prepared memo unanticipated budget cut or Decision regarding personnel overtime requests; establish Temporary courtroom 31 <<H - 10>> Reactive Decisions (Putting out fires) Hastily prepared memo unanticipated budget cut or Personnel overtime requests; establish Temporary courtroom Decision regarding unanticipated jail crowding or unanticipated new legislation 32

133 6,2)k-9)82%/7)4-)!:4%Y$&:1)%) +-<#,212':&A2)+,&<&'%$)*9:?J2) >$%''&'()>,-J2::)&')k-9,)+-9'47C 33 <<H - 11>>

134 Jail (CJS) Questions: Who is in the Jail? How did they get there? How long did they stay? How did they get out? What s changed? <<H -12>>

135 TYPES OF Jail ANALYSES BOOKINGS SNAPSHOTS COHORT <<H -13>>

136 Jail Bed Utilization Analysis January/February, 2004 & 2009 Scott County (MN) Prepared by: Mark Cunniff NIC Consultant NIC TA #: 09 J 1039 April 29, 2009 <<H -14>>

137 Table 2 Number of Jail Beds Consumed in Scott County %Change Total Adults 114 beds 121 beds 6% Contract Adults 22 beds 31 beds 43% Scott County 92 beds 90 beds -2% Table 3 Changes in Scott County jail inmates between 2004 and 2009 (excludes contract inmates and persons in the EHD program) Change Bookings 28% Average Stay -25% 9 Days 7 Days Beds Consumed -2% 92 Beds 90 Beds <<H -15>>

138 Jail Report Tables THREE TOPICAL AREAS 1. DEMOGRAPHICS SEX, RACE, AGE, RESIDENCY 2. PROCESSING BOOKINGS, PLACEMENT, ARRESTING AGENCY, CASE STATUS, RELEASE TYPE 3. CHARGE NUMBER OF CHARGES, CHARGE LEVEL, TOC TWO SETS EACH: 2009 PROFILE Change: 2004 to 2009 <<H -16>>

139 Table 4A Number of jail inmates, their average jail stay and jail beds consumed By length of stay in the jail Percent Percent Share of Average Jail Beds Share of Bookings Jail Stay Consumed JailBeds Total 100% 7 Days 90 Beds 100% <3 days 68% 1 Days 11 Beds 12% 3-7 days 21% 4 Days 11 Beds 12% 8-30 days 8% 16 Days 16 Beds 18% days 2% 50 Days 14 Beds 15% >90 days 2% 162 Days 39 Beds 43% Table 4B Changes in bookings, average stay and jail beds consumed by length of stay C H A N G E: TO Jail Bed Bookings Jail Stay Demand Jail Beds Total 28% -25% -2% -2 Beds <3 days 34% -4% 30% 3 Beds 3-7 days 28% 4% 35% 3 Beds 8-30 days 9% -9% 1% 0 Beds days -33% 1% -31% -6 Beds >90 days 56% -39% -3% -1 Beds <<H -17>>

140 Bookings Figure 1 The number of persons leaving the Scott County Jail and the number of jail beds consumed by the length of stay in the jail 1/1 thru 2/28 for 2004 and 2009 Jail Beds J A I L --- B E D C O N S U M E D _ _ 0 0 < than 3 to or < than 3 to or 3 days days days days more days 3 days days days days more days Length of stay in the jail Length of stay in the jail <<H -18>>

141 JAIL BEDS D E M O G R A P H I C S SCOTT COUNTY JAIL _ _ M F H N W B O to to Plus A E I O H L T L M S N I A H E A P T C E L A H E K R E N I I S C P AGE SEX ETHNIC RACE <<H -19>>

142 JAIL BEDS I N M A T E C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S SCOTT COUNTY _ _ S M O N C N U O TO TO OR O T 3 10 MORE T R P T E O R P P P S F I R R R C I O I I I O D M R O O O E N S R R R S S S RESIDENCY PRIOR BOOKINGS <<H -20>>

143 C A S E P R O C E S S I N G C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S SCOTT COUNTY JAIL BEDS 50 _ _ _ _ --- _ _ 10 _ _ _ _ S S S P O S N B R S T H H A R T T A O O E R E A V I H A N R R A R K A O E T D V N I O G R R E E E S F P E D D F F E P M E E P D U O T R D N U E P I T R D M ARRESTING AGENCY RELEASE REASON <<H - 21>>

144 NIC Offense Categories Person Burglary/Theft Property Drugs Traffic Non-Comply Public Order Other Murder, assault, sexual assault, robbery Burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft Trespass, forgery, fraud, vandalism, malicious mischief, stolen property Possession, manufacturing, sales (no drug paraphernalia violations) Drunk driving; NO: license, insurance, registration; other traffic violations Failure to appear, Probation/parole violations, bench warrants, etc. Public Intoxication, liquor law violations, disorderly conduct Resisting arrest, drug paraphernalia, fail to ID, etc.. <<H -22>>

145 TRAFFIC OFFENSES Cite Offence Description Count Count Driving under restriction Driving after Cancellation Driving under drug influ Driving under suspension A-20 Drunk Driving (DWI) Other Traffic Accident No Insurance Traffic Violation Driving after Cancellation A-33 Drink in vehicle Careless driving Revoked Registration Other No License Other No Insurance Other Other Speeding Other 1 <<H -23>>

146 T O P C H A R G E SCOTT COUNTY JAIL BEDS _ _ - - _ _ _ _ P B P D T N P O E U R R R O U T R R O U A N B H S G P G F L E O E S F C I R N T R I O C H T C M E Y P O F L R T Y D E R <<H -24>>

147 BEDS CHARGE CHARACTERISTICS SCOTT COUNTY O T 3 F G M N W E R I E O P L O S L O S D C C U N S E H H S Y M G G M E S I A S N D R NUMBER OF CHARGES LEVEL <<H -25>>

148 <<H -26>>

149 Appendix J Constructing a Corrections Continuum Control and Services Matrix: Instructions and Examples by Robert C. Cushman and Michael R. Jones NIC Consultants July, 2006 Purpose of the Matrix A Corrections Continuum Control and Services Matrix presents a comprehensive picture of adults under correctional supervision at any given point in time. The matrix provides a snapshot of the adults being supervised on a given day along with their sanctioning location, type of supervision, and the range and type of services being provided within the local criminal justice system. It is a planning and coordination tool that provides an easily understood, comprehensive, and common frame of reference for examining, evaluating, and improving a local correctional system. 1 Constructing the Matrix The Corrections Continuum Control and Services Matrix is like a spreadsheet (and is easily created using spreadsheet software). It is organized along two dimensions, or axes: (1) the range of correctional placement options; and (2) the range of treatment and services, including additional external controls. 2 The Vertical Axis: The Corrections Placement Options The first column of the matrix (Column A) lists the range of correctional sanctioning options. These are scaled from the least amount of control and intervention (e.g., administrative caseload) to the maximum amount of control and intervention (e.g., high security in a state correctional 1 This discussion concerns adults. A similar matrix can be constructed for juveniles. 2 In 2004, the Criminal Justice Planning Unit in Jefferson County, Colorado used these instructions to create a matrix for the county. The matrix was printed on paper (3 feet by 4 feet) using a color plotter (an oversized printer). The graphic provided a common visual conceptual framework for examining their sanctions and services. See the end of this appendix for Jefferson County s matrix. The matrix can be viewed more easily by increasing the zoom when viewing the page electronically. In addition, some printers may not have sufficient memory for printing the matrix. Cushman and Jones << I - 1>>

150 institution). Thus, as an offender moves down the listed continuum of correctional options, the offender is subjected to increasing amounts of external control by the justice system. The list of correctional placement options are grouped into two basic categories: (1) Field Supervision and (2) Custodial Placement. 3 Each of these categories is further divided into sub categories that include the typical generic correctional options. A first step that a local jurisdiction might take is to re-name these generic correctional placement options to reflect actual local circumstances. For example, the title Residential Treatment Facility A might be changed to reflect the actual name of a residential treatment facility in the community. This change will make the matrix more useful and more understandable for a local jurisdiction. The Horizontal Axis: Additional External Controls, Sanctions, and Treatment/Services Provided to Persons in Corrections Sanctioning Options Three categories extend across the top of the matrix: 1) Additional External Controls; 2) Additional Sanctions; and 3) Treatment and Services. 4 These are preliminarily subdivided into generic categories. Other subdivisions may be added within these broad categories. For example, the matrix may list Other Probation Conditions under Additional Sanctions. This will provide the opportunity to list additional conditions of probation supervision that have a specific supervision objective (e.g., electronic monitoring). Filling-in the Matrix The first two columns and the first two rows of each matrix are most important. These contain totals and are used to summarize the information in the rest of the matrix. Column A presents the correctional options. Column B should contain the total number of people being supervised in each correctional option. Column C contains the number of people receiving the first type of additional external control in each of the correctional options. Column D contains the number of people receiving the second type of additional external control in each of the correctional options etc.. Each cell should contain a number, even if that number is zero. Where the number in the cell needs an explanation or annotation, a narrative can be prepared as a footnote and attached to the matrix for reference. The narrative should identify the cell that is being described. This can be accomplished by using the column and row designation. For example, the Total Number Under Supervision is cell B-1. Column B: The Number of Offenders 3 See the tables at the end of this appendix. 4 Example categories for additional external controls, sanctions, and treatment/services appear in the Horizontal Axis table at the end of this appendix. Cushman and Jones << I - 2>>

151 The number of persons in each correctional option should be entered in column B. The objective here is to obtain an unduplicated count of persons under supervision. (This is the only column for which this will be true). When all the rows of column B are totaled, the total should represent the total number of adults being supervised at one time (cell B-1). This approach requires a decision rule to resolve those instances where a person is truly receiving two or more types of supervision. For example, a person may be on active probation and also be in jail. In this case, the person should only be counted in the category and placement option which provides the greatest degree of external control (and is thus farther down the list). However, the annotation to both the probation and the jail cells should indicate that one person who is on probation is also in the jail category. This method will allow analysis of unduplicated and duplicated counts of these individuals. Columns C through Z The cells in these columns reflect counts of the number of offenders in each correctional sanctioning option who are receiving any given additional external control, additional sanction, or treatment or service. It is likely that an individual offender may be receiving a variety of services and treatments. Thus, the row totals will almost always be greater than the total number of offenders in Column B. Here, too, the matrix approach will accommodate additional, more specific columns under the general headings that have been suggested here. These will represent additional external controls, additional sanctions, or treatment services. Annotations can be prepared and attached to the matrix to further describe the populations that are represented by numbers in any of the cells of the table. The available time and resources will serve as realistic limits to the amount of detailed annotations that can be prepared to support and further explain the numbers in the cells of the matrix. Annotations need not be completed for each cell, but there may be some cells which contain correctional populations that can be further described in terms of age, race, type of presenting correctional issue or problem, average length of stay, and so forth. Advanced Uses of the Matrix Comparing What is with What Ought to Be The matrix represents a snapshot of the correctional population at any given point in time. Once completed, members of a task force or planning group may review the matrix and come to the conclusion that there are gaps in the local justice system. That is, they would like to reallocate the number of people in some of the cells in the matrix. For example, additional external controls, additional sanctions, or additional treatment or services may need to be directed toward certain groups. In this sense, the matrix represents what is. A group exercise can be fashioned to have each person in the task force or planning group list what ought to be. Then, through negotiation, persons can come to a general consensus about major changes that would transform the what is version of the snapshot into a version that is improved and more desirable. Cushman and Jones << I - 3>>

152 Determining Capacity and the Cost Demands of Each Cell of the Matrix Any attempt to modify the existing matrix to reflect what ought to be will immediately result in the need for information about what it might cost to change the allocation of offenders within the matrix. These costs will serve to naturally limit the changes that can realistically occur. If the costs prove to be too high, the exercise in which offenders are reallocated into to different cells of the matrix must be repeated. In order to make these estimates, the task force or planning group will need to move on to another use of the matrix: To first determine the capacities and the cost of the workload in each cell of the what is and, later, do the same for the what ought to be matrix. Therefore, it will be useful to develop estimates of current program capacities and costs before engaging a task force or planning group in any exercise that might lead from what is to what ought to be. Defining current program capacities will let the participants know which sanctions and services are operating at capacity, and which are not being fully utilized. Developing estimates of the daily costs for each cell in the matrix will help participants understand the relative costs of each sanction and service. This information is most easily displayed by creating a second matrix and entering the program capacity and expenditure information into each cell of the new matrix. Here again, the most useful information will be the totals in Column B. This will summarize the expenditures and capacities of all the cells in the matrix. Methods for Determining Costs As noted above, the matrix can be used to display estimates of the daily cost of offender placement in each cell of the matrix. This exercise can be guided by: a) actual cost accounting, or b) by individual or group estimates. Actual cost counting is achieved by reviewing agency budgets and calculating the agencies daily budgets. A group exercise can be created to capture different opinions and estimates of many people. These can be averaged or negotiated to reach some consensus of the relative cost that should be associated with the specific sanctioning option and/or services being received by offenders in each cell of the matrix. Another approach is to avoid actual costs altogether and scale these options in terms of their relative coasts. These costs could be based on a correctional cost unit, where 1 unit equals the least expensive one day correctional placement in the matrix. All other cells would be assigned appropriate multiples of the correctional cost unit. An advantage to this approach is that it can be conducted as a planning exercise without having to go out and actually collect cost data or gather it through expert opinion. Determining Annual Workload Size An easy rule-of-thumb method for coming up with the total annual correctional workload is to merely multiply the numbers in each cell of the matrix by 365. This would approximate the Cushman and Jones << I - 4>>

153 annual load because the matrix represents a snapshot of a typical day. When multiplied by 365 days, the result should approximate the total annual correctional workload. 5 The actual daily capacities of the various sanctions and services can be determined by surveying the people who are responsible for administering these programs. Repeat the Process The three step cycle moves from: 1) determining what is and what ought to be; 2) preparing estimates of how this transition would change the distribution of the workload, or more particularly, changes rates of admission or length of stay; and 3) converting changes in workload into changes in costs. A planning group may have to cycle through these steps several times to fine tune a scenario that optimizes the allocation of offenders to cells of the matrix and use of resources to maximize public safety. Data from computerized information systems can provide the basic data needed for this process, and spreadsheet software can facilitate computation, but these data and software are not necessary for constructing the matrix. These advanced uses of the matrix will be particularly helpful when (1) correctional resources are limited and priorities and choices need to be made to make the most efficient and effective use of available correctional resources to maximize public protection, and (2) a jurisdiction wishes to analyze and develop an overall correctional strategy. Helpful Tips for Constructing the Matrix The staff person(s) creating the matrix may find that the following tips expedite matrix creation and make it more meaningful to the audience of stakeholders. (1) Ask justice system stakeholders to come to a consensus about the ranking of the correctional placement options from least restrictive to most restrictive. (2) Ask them to list the additional external controls, sanctions, and treatment/services that are used in each of the placement options. Staff may need to add to this list as the matrix is being constructed. (3) To get a head count of person under supervision in each of the placement options, be flexible with the date of the snapshot. Some agencies will have the head count for the last day of the previous month, whereas some may have the current day s number. Either way, ask the data provider if the number being provided is typical for the agency at this time. 5 A more sophisticated, advance method is to use the matrix to characterize the two things that actually determine the size of the correctional population: rate of admission and length of stay. Through management the two factors that determine the size of the population in each cell, it may be possible to create additional sanctioning or program capacity. An additional matrix/spreadsheet would need to be created. Each cell of the matrix would be constructed to contain the formula: (annual admissions x average length of stay = average daily population). This will permit analysis of the total annual number of days of supervision/treatment being provided to persons in each cell of the matrix. This use of the matrix will allow the user to begin modeling the changes in the correctional loads in each cell that can be expected to occur if the rates of admission or lengths of stay are changed. It will allow the user to prepare alternative scenarios, or to ask what if questions. Cushman and Jones << I - 5>>

154 (4) Ask data providers what their monthly or yearly budget/costs are for supervising this many offenders. Initially, do not worry about separating out direct from indirect (overhead) costs. Then calculate the daily cost per offender. Results will normally show a pattern that the less restrictive placement options are less expensive and the more restrictive options are more expensive. Sample Corrections Continuum Control and Services Matrix The matrix consists of cells created by the intersection of the first column and first row of the spreadsheet. Vertical Axis (Column A) 1 Total Under Supervision 2 FIELD SUPERVISION 3 PROBATION 4 Administrative 5 Banked caseload 6 Minimum Risk 7 Medium Risk 8 Maximum Risk 9 Intensive Supervision 10 Specialized Caseload #1 11 STATE PAROLE 12 Minimum Risk 13 Medium Risk 14 Maximum Risk 15 Intensive Supervision 16 Specialized Caseload #1 17 RESIDENTIAL FACILITY 18 Residential Placement #1 19 CUSTODIAL 20 LOCAL JAIL 21 Pre-sentenced 22 Minimum Risk 23 Medium Risk 24 Maximum Risk 25 Sentenced 26 Work Release 27 Minimum Risk 28 Medium Risk 29 Maximum Risk 30 STATE PRISON 31 Security Level 1 (Low) 32 Security Level 2 33 Security Level 3 34 Security Level 4 (High) 35 Etc Cushman and Jones << I - 6>>

155 Cushman and Jones << I - 7>>

156 Horizontal Axis (forms the column headings) A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P R S T U V TYPE OF CONTROL (Vertical Axis goes under here) Number of Offenders ADDITIONAL EXTERNAL CONTROLS Electronic Monitoring Day Reporting Curfew Restraining Order Drug Testing Alcohol Testing ADDITIONAL SANCTIONS Community Service Restitution Fines TREATMENT AND SERVICES Inpatient/Residential Subs Abuse Treatment Outpatient Subs Abuse Treatment Any Day Treatment Mental Health or Offender-Specific Treatment Support Group (AA, NA) GED/Educational Classes Job Skills Training Job Search Assistance Health/Medical Service Etc Cushman and Jones << I - 8>>

157 Cushman and Jones << I - 9>>