A Report of the 2003-2004 Civil Grand Jury For the City and County of San Francisco Incarceration and Beyond: Where do*

Funding for in-custody programs in the jails should be continued.

The needs of people exiting the county jails should be studied to help formulate effective programs for the homeless.

A comprehensive continuum of services to assist this population should take priority in planning for the homeless.

The Sheriff's Department should utilize a computer program to track recidivism.

A sponsor/mentor program, which would provide assistance to this population for a limited of time after they are released from custody, should be developed.

One agency overseeing all homeless programs should be developed to maintain a registry of services, act as a clearinghouse for requests for services, and audit all programs involved with the homeless.

An audit of all agencies, City departments, and community-based organizations that are charged with providing services to the homeless, should be undertaken. GLOSSARY Recidivism: habitual or chronic relapse, especially into crime or antisocial behavior • Misdemeanant: an individual found to have committed a misdemeanor • RSVP: Resolve to Stop the Violence Project • Roads to Recovery - an in-custody drug treatment for men • SISTER – an in-custody drug treatment for women OVERVIEW The San Francisco County jails house an average of 2,200 people per day at a cost of $98, or $35,770 per person per year, which is nearly $80 million annually. During the course of their incarceration, inmates have available to them a number of programs, including a Charter school established by the Sheriff. These programs are Roads to Recovery, SISTER and RSVP. The programs are geared toward helping inmates become crime free and better equipped to cope with life outside the jails. The majority of inmates are awaiting trial, while others have been committed by the Courts to county jail time (up to one year). Some have been committed to the state prison system and await transportation. Many of these programs are suited to all inmates, regardless of their status, while others are aimed at those who will be returning to the community. The vast majority of people incarcerated will be released to the community within a relatively short period. By all accounts, most programs are farsighted, innovative and beneficial to those who attend them. The Sheriff is to be commended for such extraordinary efforts. After release from the jails, a few additional programs, sponsored by the Sheriff's Department, are available. These offer job training, placement and counseling services to a limited number of people. Additionally, other programs are scattered throughout the community, offering a variety of services intended to assist people in establishing themselves in the community. Once released from custody, people must seek out these services. Post-release services provided by the Sheriff are, understandably, limited. It is not the responsibility of the Sheriff to continue to provide for released individuals. That is the responsibility of the City. There does not appear to be a comprehensive list of programs that would help people locate appropriate services. The greatest need expressed by the majority of inmates interviewed is for permanent housing. Finding employment without an address, and at least a message telephone number, is nearly impossible. Remaining crime-free becomes a staggering challenge when people are forced to sleep on the streets for lack of adequate shelter. The current shelter system is difficult to access due to limited beds. People staying in the shelters must leave early each morning and remain on the streets until late afternoon, when they must stand in line again to gain access to food and a bed. Frequently, an individual may attempt to find a bed at several shelters, only to find that there is no space. They then revert to living in doorways or any other place that seems reasonably safe. All of the education, counseling and good intentions forged while in jail are swept away by the reality of trying to survive. It is a great irony that in order to get services people need to be incarcerated. Many of the people in the county jails are misdemeanants who cycle in and out of the jails frequently. The Sheriff's Department does not track recidivists in the jails. There is, therefore, no reliable means of assessing how many people in jail have been there before. Agencies which work with individuals exiting the jails estimate that 40 - 60% of this population is homeless. This estimate coincides with the statements of approximately 80% of interviewed inmates who list housing as their first priority. An accurate picture of who comprise the homeless would assist the City in planning for and providing services to this population. If, in fact, a large number of the homeless are individuals released from the jails, planning around their needs is indicated. The logical repository of this data would be the Sheriff's Department. Many of the community-based agencies that receive funding from a variety of sources, including City funds, offer similar services to the homeless population. These services typically include counseling, twelve-step programs (for alcohol and drug addiction), job preparation and placement, as well as a smattering of other services. Programs are limited in their funds and tend to spread themselves too thin by offering a panoply of services rather than developing one area of expertise, such as job preparation and placement. The staffs of the programs tend to be by young people, either in school and getting academic credits for their work, or by recent graduates who will move on to better jobs when possible. Many programs rely heavily on volunteers who stay with the program for a limited period. Hence, there is little continuity for people in the programs, people who need consistency and personal contact with a reliable person. Many of these programs enjoy success, while others appear to be ineffectual and inconsistent in their services. There is little significant oversight of these programs. Anecdotal evidence, as reported by individuals who work with people released from the county jails, suggests that a large number of the homeless living on the streets of San Francisco are individuals who have been in and out of the jails. The Sheriff's Department has provided them with education, counseling, and other tools to help them upon release from custody. They report feeling renewed and empowered by the in- custody programs. Once released however, people find that services, for the most part, are hard to access. These individuals frequently have substance abuse problems, which have contributed greatly to their situations. They have self-esteem issues and may easily become frustrated and discouraged. Without short-term assistance upon release, many quickly return to their old habits and haunts because the system they are expected to access is daunting at best. When possible, mentors could be assigned to a person prior to their release, in order to set in place services - such as housing, counseling and job preparation and search - needed to enable a person to remain crime free. Most of the interviewed inmates were enthusiastic about the concept of a "mentor' or "sponsor" who could help them for a limited period of time following release. The savings accrued from keeping the person out of the jail system could provide funding for this program. The expense to the taxpayers of San Francisco in terms of incarceration, crime, medical care, the negative effect on tourism, and quality-of-life issues attributed to this population is exorbitant. Providing funding for programs which address their needs could prevent further offenses while significantly reducing the number of people living and dying on the streets, benefiting both the individual and the citizens. Providing relevant, quality programs will require political resolve. Significant oversight of existing and future programs is necessary. Programs not performing satisfactorily should be denied City funding. Agencies should be encouraged to develop specialties rather than trying to be all things to all people. A central clearing point for all services should be developed so that anyone can access available services with a telephone call. Permanent housing should quickly replace shelter beds. Estimates of the homeless population in San Francisco range from 6,000 to 10,000. If, in fact, 40-60% of these individuals (2,400 -6,000) are "graduates" and repeat "graduates" of the county jails, studying their needs and gearing services toward those needs can do much towards alleviating the problem. Significant reduction of the homeless population and its attendant problems will be difficult but possible. The Mayor and Board of Supervisors need to have the political will to demand quality service for money provided and a cessation of "turf wars" between agencies vying for this money. Careful monitoring of services is needed. Agencies not meeting a high standard of service should be denied access to City and County funding. A concerted effort by all agencies, both public and private, can make the difference between San Francisco's continuing to be a second-class city or reclaiming its rightful place as a first class environment for residents and visitors alike. BACKGROUND The Civil Grand Jury reviewed the in-custody programs provided to inmates by the Sheriff's Department. These programs are: Roads to Recovery, SISTER Program, RSVP (Resolve to Stop the Violence Project) and the 5 Keys Charter School. The Sheriff's Department has kept statistics on recidivism rates for these programs. Roads to Recovery is an in-custody drug treatment program that includes acupuncture, academic classes, life skills, relapse prevention, 12-step groups, anger management, family issues, community planning and recovery process groups (Attachment 1). Groups meet Monday through Friday from 7:30 AM to 3:00 PM. The 2000 recidivism study indicates that 55% of the non-treatment control group recidivated; while 44.8% of program graduates relapsed. Significantly the recidivism rate for program graduates who were transitioned into residential programs was only 35.7%. The SISTER program, the only one for women in the jails, collaborates with the Walden House Drug treatment program to provide a substance abuse course similar to Roads to Recovery. The recidivism rate for women inmates who completed the program was 40%, and 55% for the control group (Attachment 2). RSVP is the first violence prevention program of its kind in the nation (Attachment 3). Participants are held accountable for their violence as well as for refocusing and restructuring their attitudes, beliefs and behaviors. A 2002 study of recidivism, subsequent to release, for this group found the following: 2 months or more in the program: a 42.4% reduction in re-arrest for violent crimes; 3 months or more: a 50.7% reduction 4 months or more: a 79.7% reduction (Attachment 3). The Sheriff's Department received $1,352,491 for these programs in 2003 - 2004. In September 2003, the 5 Keys Charter School was opened in the jail (Attachment 4). It is believed to be the first such school in a jail nationwide. It was developed when the public schools withdrew their educational support due to budget cuts. Classes take place from 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Subjects are taught in three and four-hour blocks since only about 10% of the students remain in the program (and in custody) for a month or more. Participants can improve their grade-point average by 1.7 grades in thirty days. Inmates and deputies are equally enthusiastic about the benefits of this program. Funding comes from a variety of sources, largely grants and State funds for ADA (Average Daily Attendance). As a natural adjunct, the post-release programs were also examined, which led the jurors to explore other options available to this population when they are released from custody. Although the Sheriff's programs are laudable, they are necessarily limited in scope. Once an individual is released from jail and on their own, there is precious little assistance to be had. Post-release programs include the Garden Project, electronic home detention and monitoring, court diversion (own recognizance) and graffiti cleanup (Attachment 5). The budget for these services for FY 2003-2004 was $1,601,034. Of these programs, The Garden Project holds the most promise. Whereas the other services, i.e., home detention, court diversion and graffiti cleanup are established for people going through the Court process or fulfilling a Court order, the Garden Project is geared toward people in the community who have been released from custody after the conclusion of their court case. The Project, begun in 1982 as an in-custody program, trained inmates in organic farming and landscaping at the facility in San Bruno. Due to budget cuts, the in-custody portion of the Project was eliminated. Increased funding to restore this program in the jails is a very desirable priority of this Civil Grand Jury. The current program trains individuals in landscaping and gardening at two sites away from the jail. Participants are paid $8 per hour and work 32 hours per week. While most of the produce is donated to local senior centers, homeless shelters and family centers, a part of each harvest is sold at the Ferry Plaza Farmer's Market. The proceeds help pay salaries and fund program operation. A second part of this Project is the Tree Corps, which pays the same amount for the same length workweek. Individuals plant and maintain street trees throughout City neighborhoods. Additionally, the Project has a third component, Garden Project Trainees. These are people who are not ready to join the work force because they lack the skills to do so. Trainees work on various jobs; e.g., planting flowers in neighborhoods, delivering produce to agencies and beginning to work in the Hunter's Point Garden. The recidivism rate for all of the Jail Alternative Programs (post release) is 60% (Attachment 6). The recidivism rate for the Garden Project is 6% four months after release and 24% two years after release. These statistics are far better than those for any other post release program and suggest that actual job training that develops skills and rewards the person for achievements is a powerful tool. After investigating the in-custody and post-release programs, jurors turned to community services available to this population. There appear be numerous agencies, both public and private, which receive funding for and provide various services to the homeless population. Descriptions for most of the programs identified as service providers offered similar or identical services; e.g., counseling, job training and preparation, alcohol/drug programs, etc. According to people who accessed and are knowledgeable about these programs, their effectiveness varies widely. Jurors, with the resources to identify and locate agencies that offer services to the homeless, were unable to find a comprehensive list of all available services. Both users of the system and professionals in the field reported that accessing services is incredibly difficult. When asked about programs for the homeless in general, and for people exiting the county jail population in particular, one professional stated, "There is nothing going on out there." Additionally, agencies contracted to provide services often engage in "turf wars" over provision of those services and funding to support them. In many instances, the result is poor service delivery. Agencies need to be held accountable for funding; they should be denied City and County funding when found in violation of their contract. Careful oversight of all providers is warranted in order to ensure proper expenditure of funds and provision of services. A Life "Walter" is a Viet Nam veteran who has an alcohol problem. He lives on the Tenderloin streets and reports having been in county jails ten times. Currently in the Roads to Recovery Program, he has participated in other jail programs during previous incarcerations. He receives a monthly check from the Veteran's Administration that he admits he spends unwisely. As a result, he frequently cannot afford housing in low-rent hotels. Sleeping on the street is frightening and dangerous. He has seen people robbed and bludgeoned in their sleep. On more than one occasion, others sleeping on the streets in his vicinity have died during the night. When he tries to find space in the shelter system, he says, he is frequently turned away because the shelters are full. When he is able to get into a shelter, he can stay there from 4:00 or 5:00 PM until 7:00 the following morning. These temporary and unreliable situations are frustrating and demeaning. During the wet and cold winter months, he may commit a petty crime or be arrested for public drunkenness so that he can go to jail where he knows he will be warm and fed in a clean environment. When he is incarcerated, the Veteran's Administration is notified and his check is withheld. Upon release, he must go to the VA office to have the checks reinstated. It takes two months for the new check to arrive, during which time he has no income and is again on the streets. Thus goes the cycle for the thousands of "Walters" in San Francisco. INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS The Civil Grand Jury investigated programs provided by the Sheriff's Department for individuals incarcerated in the county jails. The Jury also investigated a number of community- based services designed to serve the homeless. The investigation included interviews with senior Sheriff's Department staff, deputies, inmates, community-based providers, a member of the Mayor's office, judges and attorneys. The Jury reviewed program descriptions and statistics related to this population. IN-CUSTODY PROGRAMS I. FINDINGS 1.1. In-custody programs administered by the Sheriff's Department are beneficial to the inmates and should be retained. Inmates participating in these programs are low- risk, non-violent offenders, most of whom are incarcerated for alcohol and drug offenses. 1.2. The 5 Keys Charter School, although in operation for less than a year, holds great promise. Students enrolled in the school are enthusiastic about this program, respond well to the teachers and are eager to learn and achieve. They report a renewed sense of accomplishment and self-esteem.