Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 (AB109)

Impacts on San Francisco County

Wendy S. StillChief Adult Probation Officer

Association for Criminal Justice Research (California)Semi-Annual Meeting

October 18, 2012

2

Prior to Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011

3

SB 678: California Community Corrections Performance Incentive Act (2009)

• Created the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) to advise each county on the implementation of community corrections on probation practices

• Provides incentives to counties for using evidence-based practices in probation supervision. Incentives are based on reduction in the number of felony probationers sent to state prison on revocations

As a result, APD received SB 678 incentive grants of $2.187 million in FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q12009 2010 2011 2012

0

100

200

300

62 46 42 49 43 35 37 18 14

256199

133

Probation Revocations Sent to State Prison Have Decreased 48% Since 2009

Number of Revocations Sent to State Prison

Annual Total

Source: Adult Probation Department

Jan-10 Apr-10 Sep-10 Dec-10 Apr-11 Sep-11 Dec-11 Apr-12 Jun-12 Aug-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-125,500

5,700

5,900

6,100

6,300

6,500

6,700

6,900

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%6779 6801

6478

64236360

6223 6129

60696023

5934 5936 59025818

16% 16%17%

18%19%

20% 19% 20% 19% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Total Active Clients Misdemeanors as a % of Total Clients

Tota

l Acti

ve P

roba

tione

rs

Perc

ent o

f Acti

ve P

roba

tione

rs

Total Number of Probationers has Decreased 14% Since 2010While the Proportion of Misdemeanor Cases has Remained Relatively Consistent

4

Source: Adult Probation Department

5

The Impact of Public Safety Realignment in San Francisco:

Adult Probation Department

6

Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-120

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

# Released to PRCS in SF*

# CDCR Projected to be Released to SF*

# of

PRC

S Cl

ient

s

APD’s PRCS Caseload is 121% of CDCR’s Projections

* By month of release from CDCR

424 Clients received from CDCR

351 Clients projected by CDCR

Source: APD & CDCR, October 2011 – September 2012

Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-120

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Total Number of 1170h sentences

Number Sentenced to Jail Only

Number Sentenced to Split Sentence

Num

ber o

f Sen

tenc

es

7

1170(h) Sentencing Trends264 sentences under 1170(h) between October 2011 and September 2012

– 143 straight jail sentences (54%)– 121 split sentences (46%)

Compared to a statewide trend of

79% straight / 21% split sentences*

* CPOC Realignment dashboard, Oct 2011 – March 2012 Source: Court Management System, October 2011 – September 2012

8

1170(h) Sentencing Lengths Oct 2011 – Sept 2012

Straight Jail Sentences

(143 sentences)

Split Sentences (121 sentences)

Jail Time Mandatory Supervision

Average Sentence Length 24 months 14 months 24 months

Average Time Served with Credits* 5.5 months 3.5 months NA

Low Sentence Length 3 months 0 months 1 month

High Sentence Length 72 months 55 months 78 months

Source: Court Management System, October 2011 – September 2012

* One-third of individuals were released at sentencing due to Credit for Time Served pre-sentence.

9

0 1 - 2 3 - 5 6 - 10 11 +0

20406080

100120140160

1330

113135

85

Number of Prior Felony Convictions

Num

ber o

f PRC

S Cl

ient

s

Current PRCS Clients’ Prior Criminal History

High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

79%

11%9%

77%

13%

7%

PRCS1170h

Risk Level of PRCS and 1170(h) Clients

Of 376 active PRCS clients, 85 clients (23%) have 11 or more prior felony convictions.

Source: Adult Probation Department, as of September 30, 2012Assessments completed by September 14, 2012

79% of PRCS and 77% of 1170h clients are high risk.

10

Most Common Need Factors of PRCS and 1170(h) Clients

Source: Adult Probation Department, COMPAS Assessments completed by September 14, 2012

Substance

Abuse

Social E

nvironment

Vocational/E

ducation

Criminal O

pportunity

Criminal P

ersonality

Cognitive Behavioral

Residential In

stabilit

y0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

67%62% 59% 59%

51% 50% 47%

Perc

ent o

f PRC

S an

d 11

70(h

) Clie

nts

11

PRCS Flash Incarcerations Total Number Reported to PRCS: 394Total Number of Flash Incarcerations Imposed: 145No. of Individuals Receiving Flash Incarceration: 88 (22% of total)

No. of Men Receiving Flash Incarceration: 80 (22% of men)No. of Women Receiving Flash Incarceration: 8 (28% of women)

Average Length of Flash Incarceration: 9 days

PRCS Violations Total Number of Violations Issued: 154No. of Individuals with One or More Violation: 111 (28% of total)

No. of Men with One or More Violation: 103 (28% of men)No. of Women with One or More Violation: 8 (28% of women)

Source: Adult Probation Department, as of September 30, 2012

13

APD’s Mandatory Supervision Clients’ Residence by Zip Code

Source: Adult Probation Department, as of September 14, 2012

9410294103

9410794109

9411094112

9411494115

9411794118

9412194122

9412494133

94134

homeless

out of c

ounty0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

# of

clie

nts

Homeless includes those reported as homeless without a zip code. Totals do not include clients for which zip code of residence is unknown

14

Sheriff’s Department

AB109 Impact on County Jails – Parole Violators

As of September 30, 2012 there were 1,316 parolees in SF County

Parole Violations – Oct 1, 2011 – Sept 17, 2012• 1,866 parole violations with no local charges

– 1,117 (60% of all violations) sentenced to county jail – 749 (40% of all violations) released with no additional county jail time

• HOLD OFF, CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED AT HEARING, RELEASE TO PROGRAM VIA CDCR, DISMISSED

• 1,068 parolees with one or more violation – 624 (58% of parole violators) with one violation– 223 (21% of parole violators) with two violations– 221 (21% of parole violators) with three or more violations

Source: Sheriff’s Department, October 2011 – September 17, 2012

15

AB109 Impact on County Jails – 1170(h) Sentences

• 264 Individuals Sentenced under 1170(h)

– 143 Straight Sentences (54% of all 1170(h) sentences)• 46 (32%) Served no additional jail time after sentencing due to Credit for

Time Served

– 121 Split Sentences (46% of all 1170(h) sentences)• 40 (33%) served no additional jail time after sentencing due to CTS

• Currently1, 44 prisoners are scheduled to be released in 2013

1 As of September 17, 2012Source: Sheriff’s Department and Superior Court

16

Department of Public Health

In Fiscal Year 2011-2012 293 AB109 participants (74% of all 398 PRCS and Mandatory Supervision clients)were referred to DPH:

• 17 (6%) presented with a serious mental illness,• 36 (12%) were placed in residential treatment services,• 44 (15%) were placed in outpatient treatment services,• 16 (5%) were placed into stabilization/transitional housing.

73% of these individuals were served outside of Realignment-funded capacity.

Top Primary Care concerns affecting this population:• High Blood Pressure• Coronary conditions• Diabetes• Hepatitis C

17

APD’s Response to Realignment• Creation of Reentry Division, Pre-Release Team, and PRCS / 1170(h) Unit• Hiring 20 new Deputy Probation Officers• Community Assessment Services Center• Partnerships with Service Providers for: job training; emergency stabilization

housing; mental health, substance abuse, case management; rental subsidies; comprehensive services, job readiness/placement; and education

• Focus on Motivational Interviewing / Strength-Based Supervision• Participation in California Risk Assessment Pilot Project (CalRAPP)• Pre-release risk and needs assessments in jail and prison• Implementation of COMPAS Risk/Needs Assessment and Individualized Treatment

and Rehabilitation Plan• County Jail Reentry Pod• SOARING 2 Pilot Project

18

Sheriff’s Department Response to Realignment

• Open a Reentry Pod in partnership with Adult Probation• Early transfer of Post-Release Community Supervision offenders from prison to

County Jail to prepare for reentry and supervision• Strengthen Risk/Needs Assessment with COMPAS (acquire and train staff)

– Validated classification component• Joint programs with criminal justice partners• Refining program eligibility• Sustain high quality in custody and community programs

19

Department of Public Health’s Response to Realignment

In FY2011-12 DPH created the Realignment Case Management Unit to provide:• Care coordination for AB 109 participants, including:

o case managemento residential treatmento outpatient serviceso primary careo stabilization housing

• A high profile portal of entry into the larger DPH system of care• Immediate access to basic health services, including health screenings, TB testing,

medications, and medically supported detox• Enrollment into Healthy San Francisco, SF PATH, and entitlements• Toxicology screening

All AB 109 clients in need of primary care medical services are sent to the Transitions Clinic, a primary care clinic exclusively for offenders and ex-offenders re-entering the community

20

District Attorney

• Alternative Sentencing Planning• Early Resolution Program (ERP) • San Francisco Sentencing Commission• Staff Capacity and Training • Leverage Funding: SF Strong• Victim Services

21

Public Defender

The Public Defender provides individuals on Post-Release Community Supervision and Mandatory Supervision with high quality legal representation and due process protections

Total Number of Clients Served (as of July 1, 2012):• PRCS 328• Mandatory Supervision 59

Total Number of Violations handled, as of July 1, 2012:• PRCS 66 (approximately) • Mandatory Supervision 4

22

Public Defender’s Response to Realignment

The Public Defender created a Realignment Team consisting of an attorney and a clinical social worker. The Roles and Responsibilities of the Realignment Team Include:

• Designing and advocating for alternative sentencing strategies• Identifying and advocating for appropriate collaborative and community court referrals• Advocating for expansion of eligibility criteria and capacity for collaborative court• Coordinating and maintaining strong partnerships with: the Reentry Council, Sentencing

Commission, Sheriff’s Community Programs, Inter-agency working groups, SF Superior Court Collaborative Courts Division, the District Attorney’s “Sentencing Planner” and Adult Probation Department’s Reentry Division

• Working closely with the office’s Reentry Unit, which consists of a Social Work program and the Clean Slate program, the social worker assesses and refers individuals for services and works with the attorney to advocate for pre-trial release, home detention, electronic monitoring and other community sentencing options

• Conducting and organizing staff trainings• Filing motions to modify and/or terminate Mandatory Supervision, as appropriate• Investigating, preparing and conducting PRCS and Mandatory Supervision revocation hearings

23

Controller’s Office• With CCPEC, developing data collection and compilation tool to measure

Realignment’s impacts County-wide

• Resulting data dashboard will integrate data from APD, the Sheriff’s Department, and the Superior Court, as well as contain aggregate data from the Department of Public Health

• Facilitating inter-agency working group with Adult Probation, Sheriff's Department, Superior Court, District Attorney, and JUSTIS/City Administrator to identify and resolve AB109-related process gaps

24

Questions? For more questions and comments, contact:

CCPEC ChairChief Adult Probation Office Wendy Still M.A.S.

(415) 553-1687 wendy.still@sfgov.org

Adult Probation Department, Hall of Justice, 880 Bryant Street, 2nd floor,

San Francisco, CA 94103