📋

Extraído del Informe Consolidado

Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.

Orange County Grand Jury • 2014-2015

Ab109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective? Ab109 Caseload Size for Probation Officers Determining the

Published: November 03, 2014 1 pages

View PDF View Full Original

⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

Findings 8 findings

Orange County Probation Department’s Policies and Procedures Manual is consistent with professional standards for use of risk assessment tools and determination of classification levels for each AB109 offender.

Orange County Probation Department’s Policies and Procedures Manual is not consistent with professional standards for development of supervision plans for AB109 offenders, including frequency and types of contacts.

Orange County Probation Department’s Policies and Procedures Manual does not identify the maximum caseload size for Probation Officers supervision of AB109 offenders.

Orange County Probation Department's Policies and Procedures Manual does not provide adequate requirements for drug-testing classifications or frequency guidelines.

Orange County Probation Department's Policies and Procedures Manual does not provide adequate requirements to address the issue of drug-testing avoidance or recommend responses for AB109 probationers who attempt to avoid positive drug tests by failing to appear or by diluting their urine samples.

Orange County Probation Department does not incorporate current technology (refractometer) in its drug testing system. Including such technology may assist in the ability to quickly detect diluted urine samples provided by probationers.

The Orange County Probation Department and Health Care Agency have lost an opportunity to reduce recidivism by not increasing residential drug treatment options for AB109 probationers over outpatient treatment or incarceration. AB109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective? 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury

There exists a need for increased housing availability for AB109 probationers who are homeless. RECOMMENDATIONS 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 by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “AB109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective?” the 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following six recommendations:

Recommendations 6

R1

Standards and guidelines for AB109 offender supervision, such as number of contacts, home visits, drug tests, and collateral contacts based on the risk-needs assessment should be included in the Orange County Probation Department's Policy and Procedures (F.1., F.2.)
R2

The Orange County Probation Department should take steps to lower caseload sizes consistent with American Probation and Parole Association standards of no more than a 40:1 ratio caseload per officer for high-risk offenders. (F.3.)
R3

Standards and guidelines should be included in the Policies and Procedures Manual to address failures to report for drug testing. (F.5.)
R4

The Orange County Probation Department should implement standards and guidelines in its Policy and Procedures Manual to address the frequently used technique of "flushing" to avoid drug detection and a refractometer or other dilution-measuring device should be used to improve the integrity of the drug- testing program. (F.4., F.5., F.6.)
R5

The Health Care Agency and the Probation Department should assess current funding priorities and options to seek additional residential drug treatment beds. (F.7.)
R6

The Social Services Agency should address the needs of the AB109 offenders who are homeless or who experience instability in housing. (F.8.) REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, 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 comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (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 on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected AB109 Offenders: Are Current Probation Strategies Effective? 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code section 933.05, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), provides as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be 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 applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (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 agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by 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 response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code section 933.05 are required from: Responses Required: Orange County Board of Supervisors: Findings F.1., F.2., F.3., F.4., F.5., F.6.,