Transcript No Slide Title

ORANGE COUNTY
SACPA/PC1210
Three-Year Report
Sandy Hilger, Research Division , OC Probation
Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division, OC Probation
Alaka Nafday and Curt Condon Quality Management, OC HCA
Mary Hale, Division Manager, OC HCA-ADAS
ORANGE COUNTY
PROBATION DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF ORANGE
HEALTH CARE AGENCY
1
Legal Issues




SACPA applies to 3 categories of defendants: New
Offenders, Probationers, and Parolees.
Applies to anyone convicted of a non-violent drug
possession offense on or after 7-1-01.
Applies to anyone on probation for a non-violent drug
possession offense or on after 7-1-01, who violates that
probation by getting arrested for a non-violent drug
possession offense.
Parolees who are on parole on 7-1-01 who violate parole
by getting arrested for a non-violent drug possession
offense.
2
Legal Issues
A non-violent drug possession offense is:
1. unlawful possession, or
2. use, or
3. “transportation for personal use”
of any substance listed on California’s five
controlled substance schedules.
PC1210 (a)
NVDP also applies to being under the influence of any
controlled substance in violation of H&S 11550.
3
Legal Issues

The term “Non-Violent Drug Possession Offense”
does not include:
1 1. Possession for sale or
2 2. Production or
3 3. Manufacture of any Controlled Substance
4
Legal Issues

Defendants are ineligible for SACPA if previously
convicted of 1 or more serious or violent felonies
(strikes), and if within the last 5 years they:
1 a. were in prison, or
2 b. were convicted of a felony other than a nonviolent drug possession offense, or
3 b. were convicted of a misdemeanor involving
physical injury or the threat of physical injury to
another person.
5
Legal Issues
Defendants are ineligible if while using a firearm
they either possess or were under the influence of
Cocaine, Heroine, Methamphetamine, or PCP.
 Defendant is ineligible if he/she refused drug
treatment as a condition of probation.
 Defendant is ineligible if convicted in the same
proceeding of a misdemeanor or felony unrelated
to the use of drugs.

6
Legal Issues

If the defendant qualifies and accepts drug
treatment under SACPA, sentencing will include:
1 1. mandatory probation
3 2. mandatory participation in a licensed or
certified treatment program (maximum 12
months with 6 months of aftercare)
Sentencing will not include incarceration as a
condition of probation
7
Legal Issues
SACPA splits probation violations into 2 categories,
drug related and non-drug related:
 On Non-drug related violations, the court may revoke
probation.
 On the first and second drug related violations, rather
than revoking probation, the court may intensify
treatment.
 On the third drug-related violation, or if the defendant
is found to present a threat to community safety, then
the court may revoke probation.
8
Legal Issues
The defendant may petition for dismissal of the
charges at any time after the completing drug
treatment.
 Unlike Drug Court, if the defendant is successful
at the hearing, the court shall dismiss the
indictment and the arrest shall be deemed “to have
never occurred.”

9
Legal Issues
In order to grant a dismissal, the court must find:
 the defendant has substantially complied with the
conditions of probation, and
 the defendant has completed a prescribed course of
drug treatment, and
 that as a result of that treatment there is “reasonable
cause” to believe the defendant “will not abuse
controlled substances in the future”.
10
Background



PC1210/SACPA became effective on July
1, 2001.
Primary intent: to provide drug treatment
rather than incarceration to eligible nonviolent adult drug offenders
Goals:
 preserve jail and prison cells for serious and
violent offenders
 enhance public safety by reducing drugrelated crimes
 improve public health by reducing drug
abuse
11
Background
The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention
Act has had a dramatic affect on County
resources.
In terms of the Orange County Probation
Department alone:

Over 11,000 offenders had entered
probation on PC1210 by July 2004

By July 2004, 45% of adults on
probation were past or current
participants in PC1210
12
Evaluating the results
We examined the results, three years
after implementation, for 3863 offenders
who agreed to participate in SACPA during
the first year (July 2001 - June 2002).
13
Questions:
1. What is the status of the 3863 participants
three years later?
2. How well, or poorly, did the offenders move
through the system? Where did offenders fall out
of the system?
3. Did SACPA probationers present a threat to
the community? (criminal history background
and recidivism while on Probation)
4. Were SACPA probationers amenable to
probation and treatment services. Did they show
progress in terms of rehabilitation and
improvement of life competencies?
14
Where are they three years later?
Statuses of first-year PC1210 individuals as of July 2004
(N = 3863)
Other
1% (N = 36)
Conditional/relief of
supervision
7% (258)
Had cases
successfully
dismissed
19% (N = 725)
Out on w arrant
19% (741)
Sentenced to state
prison
16% (N = 622)
On PC1210
probation
14% (557)
On regular probation
17% (656)
Termination category
unknow n
7% (N = 268)
15
Where did we lose them?
Successfully Dismissed
19% (725)
18.8%
23.9%
Completed Treatment
24% (924)
(includes the 725 dismissed)
Enrolled in
Treatment
59% (2259)
Assessed and Referred
to Treatment
Seen by Probation
and Referred to HCA
Referred by the Courts
72% (2785)
89% (3444)
100% (3863)
16
Offense profile of PC1210 probationers
Initial sustained offense:
PC1210
Offenders
General Adult
Probationers
Offense Level:
72% were felonies
Offense Level:
90% were felonies
Offense type:
2% person
3% property
92% drug
Offense type:
22% person
15% property
55% drug
17
Violations during term of probation

Probationers who entered Probation due to a
PC1210 offense had fewer new law violations
than the average adult probationer.
 24% had one or more new law violations
versus 31% of non-PC1210 probationers.

Among the terminating SACPA probationers from
the first year group,
 54% of new law violations were misdemeanors
 85% of new law violations were drug-related
18
Do PC1210 offenders respond to services?
Probation assessments of risk and need
factors at probation entry and exit indicated
improvements in almost all areas.
Areas of significant improvement included:
* drug addiction, and alcohol addiction,
* vocational ability, employment,
* companions, and physical health,
* overall risk of recidivism
* overall needs score
19
Treatment completion rates:

The treatment completion rate for the first
group (24%) was the same as the average
for SACPA participants across the State.

In comparison to the State, OC “lost” more
offenders before entering treatment, but
kept more offenders once they entered
treatment.
20
In summary:

The majority of those who fell out of SACPA
continued to be held accountable within the
criminal justice system.

All SACPA probationers showed significant
gains in competency except for those who
terminated from Probation and went to prison.
21
Did we meet the SACPA goals?

Rate of incarceration for California in comparison
to the national rate:
500
450
400
National Rate
02
20
01
20
00
20
99
19
98
19
97
19
96
19
19
19
95
350
94
Number Incarcerated per 100,000
Rate of Incarceration
California Rate
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bulletins “Prisoners in 1994” through “Prisoners in
2003”, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/p03.pdf
22
Did we meet the SACPA goals?

Preserving jail and prison beds
 The rate of prison incarceration for low level drug
offenses: (CDC Data)
Orange
County
2001 658
(.23 per 1000
population)
Average across
CA counties
144.8
(.20 per 1000
population)
2002 515
111
(.17 per 1000
population)
(.18 per 1000
population)
Garrick Percival, UC Riverside, based on CDC data.
23
Did we meet the SACPA goals?

Reducing Drug Related Crime
 76% of year-one participants had no new
law violations while on Probation.
 Needs/Risk assessment scores from start to
finish of Probation showed a significant
reduction in risk of recidivism as well as a
significant reduction in drug abuse
24
Did we meet the SACPA goals?

Improving public health - first year group
 59% (2259) enrolled in treatment
 24% (924) completed treatment
(approximately 200 of these completed
residential)

Probation NIC assessments indicated a
significant improvement in drug addiction,
vocational ability, employment,
companions, and physical health
25
HCA Modifications after the first year





Treatment assessments were conducted by
providers rather than HCA (2003 to present)
Increased flexibility is given to providers to
augment treatment with additional services
(2003 to the present)
Intensification of Outpatient I and II (2003 to
the present)
Funding cuts forced the reduction of the
highest level of outpatient treatment and of
residential treatment in 2003
Increase in residential treatment (2004 to
present)
26
HCA Modifications after the first year


Co-location of HCA assessment staff with
Probation staff.
More intensive probation supervision of
higher risk cases made possible by:
 Creation of field monitored (banked) caseloads for
lower risk cases (2003)
 Elimination of most new misdemeanor cases from
formal probation (9/1/2004)
 Petitioning the court for relief of supervision
immediately upon completion of treatment

Increased supervision activities as evidenced
by over 264% increase in the number of
home-calls and searches.
27
Future Plans




Identify and implement preventative measures to
reduce the number of individuals who go out to
warrant.
Work more closely with local law enforcement to
address the issue of individuals once they go out to
warrant.
Focus upon the issue of improving employment
rates for SACPA probationers.
Conduct workload time study of PC1210 units in
order to ensure the most efficient and effective use
of Probation resources.
28
Sources of Information





Goals of SACPA: Official SACPA web-site at:
http://www.adp.cahwnet.gov/SACPA/prop36.shtml
UCLA state evaluation: “Evaluation of the Substance
Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, 2003 Report”, Doug
Longshore, et. al. UCLA
Incarceration Rates for Drug Offenses: “The Influence
of Local Contextual Characteristics on the
Implementation of a Statewide Voter Initiative…,
Percival, Garrick, Policy Studies Journal; 2004, Vol. 32
Issue 4, p589. (UC Riverside) (Data shared during
communications with the author).
Treatment Information: Orange County Probation
PC1210 Shared Database System.
Violation Data while on Probation: Orange County
probation department NIC Risk/Needs Assessment
database and Case Management System database.
29
Sources of Information





Successful Case Dismissals: Orange County Probation
Case Management System data verified with Orange
County Public Defender data.
Prison Incarcerations of First-Year PC1210 Participants:
Orange County NIC Risk/Needs data verified against case
information from the Orange County District Attorney
Office and Superior Court.
Improvements in Probationers’ Competency Levels:
Orange County NIC Risk/Needs assessment data as
entered by the deputy probation officers.
Offense Rates while on Probation: Orange County
Probation Business Plan 2003.
Criminal History Profiles and Offenses while on
Probation: Data from Orange County Probation Case
Management System and NIC Risk/Needs Databases.
30
Contacts
Orange County Probation Department:
•Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division (714)-569-2222
•Sandy Hilger, Research Analyst, Research Division (714) 569-2055
Orange County Health Care Agency:
•Mary Hale, Mary Hale, Division Manager, OC HCA-ADAS (714) 667-3968
•Alaka Nafday, Quality Management, OC HCA (714) 834-7653
31