⚠️ 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.
Findings and Recommendations 14 findings
F1
The present administrative policy for Electronic Home Detention (EHD) does not set out an individual’s right, or the procedure, to appeal the denial of participation in the EHD program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider revising the administrative policy for EHD to include an explanation of the right to appeal under California Penal Codes Sections 1203.018 and 1203.016.
F2
The Custody Alternative Facility (CAF) “Notice of Disqualification” does not cite Penal Code Section 1203.018(g)(2) (pre-trial EHD).
No recommendations for this finding
F3
The CAF “Notice of Disqualification” cites Penal Code Section 1203.016(d)(2) (post- sentencing EHD).
No recommendations for this finding
F4
CAF does provide notice to attorneys of record of denials and disqualifications for pre-trial individuals.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
If the participant is post-sentencing, the Notice of Disqualification is not sent to the last known attorney of record.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
CAF sends the Notice of Disqualification to participants at their last known address.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
Lack of notice of appeal rights to the last known attorney of record of a participant limits the participant’s opportunity for effective representation in the appeal of the CAF denial or removal.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider directing CAF to send a post- sentencing “Notice of Disqualification” to the address of the last known attorney of record in addition to the notice mailed to the denied participant.
F8
CAF does not report demographic information on denials or disqualifications.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider collecting and publishing demographic information on denials or disqualifications for all three CAF programs.
F9
CAF does not report who is denied participation in the three programs.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
CAF does not report reasons for denial or disqualification.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider collecting and publishing reasons for denials or disqualifications for all three CAF programs.
F11
CAF does not report rates of recidivism for those who are on EHD.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider collecting and publishing rates of recidivism for EHD participants.
F12
The costs of the three CAF programs are never disaggregated; therefore, there is insufficient information to identify the cost of each separate program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider collecting and publishing separate cost data for each of the CAF programs.
F13
In 2025, the Board of Supervisors authorized the Sheriff’s Office to hire and designate staff to facilitate data collection.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Not all EHD forms used by the public are available in languages other than English.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
By December 31, 2026, the Sheriff’s Office should consider translating all documents used by individuals in the CAF process into Spanish and Mandarin.
In the News 1
News coverage of this report, automatically tracked.
Grand Jury Finds Improvements Needed In Contra Costa's Electronic Home Detention Program
CLAYCORD
· June 2, 2026