alameda county probation department...haleh soltani information technology unit vacant fiscal,...
TRANSCRIPT
Alameda County Probation Department
1
ACPD
2
• Lack of use of evidence based practices
• Inadequate ability to collect, store and analyze data
• Lack of effective program evaluation strategies
• Outdated or nonexistent policy and standards
Probation Assessment Process
3
Unable to report accurate recidivism
rates due to inadequate
collection, storage and analysis of
data
Service Providers have been chosen
based on anecdotal
evidence of reputation and
previous experience
Management structure doesn’t allow for focused attention on data
collection and evidence based
analysis
Must develop an evidence-based
vendor evaluation system to ensure
that service decisions
impacting clients are based on data
Probation Assessment Process
4
Effective use of Evidence-Based
Practices for improved outcomes
Data driven client decisions to
improve public safety
Timely and efficient contracts
for servicesValid, consistent,
current policy and standards
Reorganization Goal
• Background Investigations
• Internal Affairs
• 300+ Policies• 4 manuals
• Best Practices• Outcomes• Scope of
Language• Program efficacy• Reduced RFP
contract time
ACPD Reorganization Proposal
5
• Employment (1400 Jobs)
• Housing• Education• Family Reunification• Barrier Removal• Substance use
disorder• Mental Health• Dual diagnosis• CCPEC Support
(AB109)
Reorganization Includes:
• Contract compliance
• Improve timeframes for contract development and award (CBO’s)
• Integrate data driven decision making
• Produce demographic and recidivism statistics
• Achieve measurable outcomes and ensure effective services
ACPD Reorganization Proposal
6
• Increases reimbursement potential
• Juvenile probation claiming oversight
Reorganization Includes:
7
Evidence Based Practices8 Principles of Effective Intervention:
(National Institute of Corrections, 2017)
1. Assess Actuarial Risk/Needs
2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation
3. Target Intervention
a. Risk Principle (Who)
b. Need Principle (What)
c. Treatment Principle (How)
d. Fidelity Principle (How Well)
4. Skill Train with Directed Practice
5. Increase Positive Reinforcement
6. Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities
7. Measure Relevant Processes/Practices
8. Provide Measurement Feedback
8
ACPD Transformation- Reorganization Proposal
1 2 3 4 5
Note: Yellow boxes represent new units and/or positions.
Alameda County ProbationExecutive Administration
MARCUS DAWALDEPUTY CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICERADULT FIELD SERVICES
EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
WEB DEVELOPER III
LABOR ANALYST
FINA PEREZEXECUTIVE PROGRAM
COORDINATOR
MARIANA DAILEYPROGRAM SERVICES
COORDINATOR
KAREN BAKERASSISTANT CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICER
SHEREEN KHANTRAINING UNIT
BEATRICE SPIKESADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
SERVICES
DEBBIE LICANOHUMAN RESOURCES/PAYROLL
UNIT
HALEH SOLTANIINFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
UNIT
VACANTFISCAL, CONTRACTS,
PROCUREMENT AND AUDITINGUNIT (12 FTE)
EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICES UNIT (4 FTE)
ESA EHMEN -KRAUSEASSISTANT CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICER
IAN LONGDEPUTY CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICERJUVENILE FACILITIES
STACEY WOOTENDEPUTY CHIEF PROBATION
OFFICERJUVENILE FIELD SERVICES
TITLE IV-E UNIT(5 FTE
JESSICA FORTDIRECTOR OF TRANSITIONAL AGE COORDINATOR/SB104
DIRECTOR
CHRISTIAN PEDROTTIACTING DIRECTOR
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDSUNIT (10 FTE)
POLICY AND STANDARDSCOMPLIANCE UNIT
(9 FTE)
RE-ENTRY SERVICES UNIT(6 FTE)
PROGRAM DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT UNIT
(3 FTE)
NATASHA MIDDLETONLEGISLATIVE COORDINATOR
(PROBATION SPECIALIST) (TAP)
NICOLE LAWLESSADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
MYKEISHA LEWISDIVISION DIRECTOR
DENNIS BRADSHAWDIVISION DIRECTOR
CRAIG EMMONSDIVISION DIRECTOR
ANTHONY VILLEGASDIVISION DIRECTOR
RYAN MCCREARYDIVISION DIRECTOR
WENDY STILL, MASCHIEF PROBATION OFFICER
SINDY GUINN-BEGLEYDIVISION DIRECTOR
PAULYNNE JONESDIVISION DIRECTOR
VACANTSUPERINTENDENTCAMP SWEENEY
VACANTSUPERINTENDENT
JUVENILE HALL
BRIAN HOPSONASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT
PAT HSUADMINISTRATIVE FINANCIAL
SERVICES DIRECTOR
JENIFER BROWNDIVISION DIRECTOR
RESEARCH AND EVALUATIONUNIT (6 FTE)
Net FTE Change By Unit
10
FY 2017-2018 FY 2018-2019 FY 2018-2019Department Name FTE FTE Cost Increase (in millions)Professional Standards Unit 0* 0* $0.16Policy and Standards Compliance Unit 9 9 $1.69Re-Entry Services Unit 6 6 $1.21Program Design & Development Unit 3 3 $0.59Title IV-E Unit 4 5 $0.88Research and Evaluation Unit 6 6 $1.03Evidence Based Practices Unit 4 4 $0.76Fiscal, Contracts, Procurement, & Auditing Unit 11 11 $1.97New Management Positions 6 6 $1.38
Total 49 50 $9.67FTE using savings from vacant funded positions (15.7) (15.7)
Net Increase 33.3 FTEs 34.3 FTEs*Reclassify existing positions
11
FY 2017-2018 (in millions) FY 2018-2019 (in millions)
Budgeted Resources Available:• Vacant Funded Positions $1.63 $1.63
• Additional YOBG Revenue $1.25 $1.25
• Additional JJCPA Revenue $1.96 $1.96
• Additional Title IV-E Revenue $0.82 $1.04
• Additional SB 678 Revenue $0.64 $0.64
Incremental Resource Adjustments:• Additional CA Prop 47 Revenue $0.20 $0.20
• Additional CA Prop 57 Revenue $0.20 $0.20
Total Funding Available: $6.70 $6.92AB109 Budget Request: $0 $2.81
Probation Funding Available
12
Current Job Title Number of FTE Funding Amount (in millions)
Deputy Chief Probation Officer* 1 $0.26Institutional Supervisor I 1 $0.16Juvenile Institutional Officer Intermittent 0.64 $0.06Juvenile Institutional Officer 0.07 $0.01Probation Aide 1 $0.10Senior Food Service Worker 1 $0.08Senior Management Analyst 0.42 $0.06Specialist Clerk I 9 $0.76Transportation Worker SAN 1.57 $0.14
TOTAL 15.70 $1.63*Position moves from general fund to grant fund
Vacant Funded Positions for Reorganization
13
Probation Reorganization CostsFY 2017-2018 (in millions)
FY 2018-2019 (in millions)
Reorganization Estimation: $6.35 $9.67
Probation Funding Available: $6.70 $6.92
AB109 Additional Funding Needed: $0 $2.81
Gap in Funding (with approved AB109 Increase): $0 $0
14
STAFFF HIRING PROCESS (180 DAYS)
14
NEXT STEPS
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS* (180 DAYS)
DATA AND RESEARCH (180 DAYS)
15