📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Score: +3
(3/1/0)
Orange County Grand Jury
• 2014-2015
Ab109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective?
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F2, F4, F5, F6
Findings 4 findings
F1
Page 272
Orange County Probation Department’s Policies and Procedures Manual is REPORT officer supervised 83 cases. Considering the caseload standards of the APPA, the consistent with professional standards for use of risk assessment tools and 8 current caseload size for 23 of the officers may be considered manageable. However, determination of classification levels for each AB109 offender. the 10 remaining officers are supervising more than the APPA recommended for optimal service and community safety. F.2. Orange County Probation Department’s Policies and Procedures Manual is not REPORT consistent with professional standards for development of supervision plans for 9 Conclusion AB109 offenders, including frequency and types of contacts. REPORT Historically, probation departments have two major roles: social work or the
F3
Page 272
Orange County Probation Department’s Policies and Procedures Manual does 10 rehabilitation role, and the law enforcement role, assuring compliance with the not identify the maximum caseload size for Probation Officers supervision of conditions of probation, and holding the probationer accountable—all aimed at the AB109 offenders. ultimate goal of community protection. While most agencies tend to gravitate toward REPORT one end of the social work-law enforcement continuum (rehabilitation v. enforcement), F.4. Orange County Probation Department's Policies and Procedures Manual does 11 ideally, departments will possess a proper balance, providing both treatment services, not provide adequate requirements for drug-testing classifications or frequency while assuring compliance with the conditions of probation. guidelines. REPORT 12 The Grand Jury observed that the OCPD provides considerable drug treatment F.5. Orange County Probation Department's Policies and Procedures Manual does opportunities to its AB109 offenders. Treatment services can always be improved, and not provide adequate requirements to address the issue of drug-testing we observed a shortage of residential resources. Specifically, the Health Care Agency avoidance or recommend responses for AB109 probationers who attempt to REPORT in October 2014, implemented a change in policy to reduce availability of residential avoid positive drug tests by failing to appear or by diluting their urine samples. 13 treatment beds, thereby creating a waiting list. The number of beds for AB109 offenders was limited to 25 per month. Several of the OCPD staff indicated that this restriction F.6. Orange County Probation Department does not incorporate current technology REPORT prevented the reform of AB109 offenders who would greatly benefit by residential drug (refractometer) in its drug testing system. Including such technology may assist 14 treatment. There were also indications of a need for more sober-living beds, and more in the ability to quickly detect diluted urine samples provided by probationers. housing for identified sex offenders. REPORT
F7
Page 272
The Orange County Probation Department and Health Care Agency have lost an 15 The Grand Jury observed that the intensity of supervision for AB109 offenders opportunity to reduce recidivism by not increasing residential drug treatment fell short of recognized standards. The number of supervision contacts was inconsistent options for AB109 probationers over outpatient treatment or incarceration. REPORT 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury REPORT 1 AB109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective? REPORT
F8
Page 273
There exists a need for increased housing availability for AB109 probationers 2 who are homeless. REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 3 In accordance with California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the 2014- 2015 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected REPORT by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are submitted to the 4 Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “AB109 Offenders: Are Current Probation REPORT Strategies Effective?” the 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following 5 six recommendations: REPORT
Recommendations 5
-
R1Page 273Standards and guidelines for AB109 offender supervision, such as number of 6 contacts, home visits, drug tests, and collateral contacts based on the risk-needs assessment should be included in the Orange County Probation Department's REPORT Policy and Procedures (F.1., F.2.) 7
-
R2Page 273The Orange County Probation Department should take steps to lower caseload sizes consistent with American Probation and Parole Association standards of no REPORT more than a 40:1 ratio caseload per officer for high-risk offenders. (F.3.) 8
-
R3Page 273Standards and guidelines should be included in the Policies and Procedures REPORT Manual to address failures to report for drug testing. (F.5.) 9
-
R4Page 273The Orange County Probation Department should implement standards and guidelines in its Policy and Procedures Manual to address the frequently used REPORT technique of "flushing" to avoid drug detection and a refractometer or other 10 dilution-measuring device should be used to improve the integrity of the drug- testing program. (F.4., F.5., F.6.) REPORT 11 R.5. The Health Care Agency and the Probation Department should assess current funding priorities and options to seek additional residential drug treatment beds. (F.7.) REPORT 12
-
R6Page 273The Social Services Agency should address the needs of the AB109 offenders who are homeless or who experience instability in housing. (F.8.) REPORT 13 REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code section 933 requires the governing body of any public REPORT agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, 14 to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such REPORT comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report 15 (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected official shall comment REPORT on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected 16 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury REPORT AB109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective? 1 REPORT official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to 2 the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code section 933.05, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), REPORT provides as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: 3 (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of REPORT the following: 4 (1) The respondent agrees with the finding REPORT (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case 5 the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. REPORT (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report 6 one of the following actions: REPORT (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the 7 implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented REPORT in the future, with a time frame for implementation. 8 (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the REPORT scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be 9 prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when REPORT applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of 10 the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or REPORT is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. 11 (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the REPORT agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by 12 the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The REPORT response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the 13 findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. REPORT Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal 14 Code section 933.05 are required from: Responses Required: REPORT 15 Orange County Board of Supervisors: Findings F.1., F.2., F.3., F.4., F.5., F.6.,
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.