County Jail  The reports of investigations by the Sheriff’s office into inmate deaths while in custody at County Jail,

Recommendations 10

• R1

  Page 54
  The Sheriff and the County Health Agency should conduct a joint review of the adequacy and appropriateness of management structure, policies, and procedures related to inmate safety, physical and mental health (including suicide prevention), and should issue a public report
• R2

  Page 45
  Disciplinary actions taken against staff for inmate-related issues
• R3

  Page 45
  Escapes a) Details b) Remedial actions
• R4

  Page 45
  Use of force incidents
• R5

  Page 45
  Health services a) How delivered b) Common medical problems c) Public health concerns
• R6

  Page 45
  Injuries a) Injuries to inmates due to aggression/agitation b) Accidental injuries to inmates requiring medical attention great than first aid c) Injuries to staff by inmates due to assault or managing inmate aggression/agitation
• R7

  Page 45
  Suicide a) Suicide attempts/deaths b) Serious self-injury incidents require medical attention beyond first aid
• R8

  Page 45
  Drugs a) Drug overdoses b) Drug deaths by overdose
• R9

  Page 45
  Deaths a) Other deaths
• R10

  Page 45
  Training (title, hours, and instructor credentials for each type) a) Managing inmate violence b) Handling mental health behaviors c) Responding to drug/alcohol related problems 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 43 (This page intentionally blank.) 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 44 JUVENILE HALL: SAFE, SECURE AND SUPPORTIVE ….BUT DOES IT HAVE SURPLUS SPACE? SUMMARY In 2016 San Luis Obispo County (County) completed a $20 million expansion of its Juvenile Hall (Hall), increasing it from 18,000 to 42,000 square feet and from 45 to 65 beds. The project was many years in the making. While 15, 10 or even 5 years ago, no one would have questioned the need for a larger Hall, a look through the rear-view mirror suggests it may have been overbuilt. When a facility has excess space, there is the potential for unnecessary cost. The County’s Probation Department (Probation) is implementing a program that will make use of some of this excess space. In fact, repurposing some of this space was one of the County’s objectives in building the larger Hall. Adding more space to the Hall has allowed Probation to realize a long-term goal: converting part of the Hall to an in-custody treatment program. Probation is repurposing an old 15-bed unit and using some of the Hall’s new space to treat youthful offenders in a secure setting. The treatment program adds 7 juvenile services officers to the Hall’s staff of 36. The program is expected to pay for itself by saving the County money it would otherwise spend placing these youthful offenders elsewhere. Potential for underuse remains even with the inclusion of the treatment program. Unless staffing can flex with the Hall’s daily census, other uses may need to be made of the Hall’s excess space to make the facility cost-effective. 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 45 Juvenile Hall ORIGIN The Grand Jury initiated this report of its own volition and not from a complaint. AUTHORITY California Penal Code section 919(b) requires the Grand Jury to “inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons within the county.” METHOD/PROCEDURE The Grand Jury gathered information for this report through:  Interviewing Probation, the District Attorney’s Office (DA), Department of Social Services and County Office of Education relevant staff  Holding discussions with other juvenile justice stakeholders  Studying reports listed in the bibliography, including Marin and San Mateo county civil grand jury reports that expressed similar concerns about juvenile detention facility excess space  Reviewing relevant County Board of Supervisors (Board) meeting materials, budget reports, juvenile detention needs assessment reports and information requested from County officials  Analyzing County juvenile population growth estimates prepared by California’s Department of Finance  Researching issues and trends related to juvenile offenders, juvenile justice and repurposing of juvenile detention facilities  Visiting the Hall, once in September 2016, before the expansion was occupied and again in March 2017, after the transition occurred and the treatment program was underway INTRODUCTION San Luis Obispo County has a population of about 22,600 youths age 10 to 17 and a Juvenile Hall with beds for 65 youths. Before its recent expansion, it had 45 beds. Juvenile arrests, booking into 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 46 Juvenile Hall the Hall, and the Hall’s average daily population have declined significantly since fiscal year 2010-11 when planning for the expanded Hall was well underway. Juvenile crime is down and the growth of the County’s youth population has stagnated. Unless trends reverse, the larger Hall will have underutilized space. Probation is using a portion of the expanded Hall’s excess space —an old 15-bed housing unit— for an in-custody treatment program which has long been identified by the County as a gap in its youth services. Operating costs for this repurposed space are expected to be offset by revenues and cost-savings in other areas so the program can pay for itself rather than adding more cost to running the larger Hall. Even with the repurposing of some of its old detention beds, the Hall may still be too big to operate cost-effectively. Other repurposing may be needed, or cost-reduction measures put in place, to operate the expanded Hall in a more cost-effective manner. NARRATIVE The Hall is the detention arm of the County’s juvenile services center. It is located at 1067 Kansas Avenue, about five miles west of the city of San Luis Obispo. The original Hall was completed in 1981. Before its expansion, it had 45 beds. The expansion provides higher-security beds and space to better serve youths’ therapeutic, educational and recreational needs. It also improves working conditions for staff. The State paid $13.1 million toward the cost of the expansion. County general fund dollars paid the remaining $6.9 million. California is selling bonds to finance its share of the expansion’s cost. Until these bonds have been paid, the State has a say in how the new space can be used10. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, in conjunction with the State of California Public Works Board, is providing long-term financing for the State’s funding of the expansion through the sale of lease revenue bonds. The State is subleasing the new space back to the County so that the County can operate the new space over the term the bonds are paid back to the State. The new space represents the security for the bonds. 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 47 Juvenile Hall THE ORIGINAL HALL—WHAT WAS LACKING Reports to the Board indicate Probation considered the old facility inadequate in many ways. Concerns included:  No adequate administrative or staff space. The juvenile hall’s superintendent and assistant superintendent were housed in space with no privacy to conduct personnel matters. Staff lockers were located inside the facility’s staff meeting room which created access problems when the room was in use.  No showers or changing facilities for staff. Staff had to be sent home to change when contaminated by bodily fluids or pepper spray.  No private counseling space for therapists to conduct individual or group therapy for youth with mental health issues.  No designated classrooms. Education was conducted in the housing units and was subject to disruption by youth confined to their sleeping rooms.  No adequate indoor space for legally-required large muscle activity.  No high-security rooms. The facility lacked higher security housing for youth posing a greater security risk and requiring greater separation from the rest of the youth population. WHAT THE BUILD-OUT PROVIDED The expansion built three separate structures, including:  A single-story 8600 square foot building with 20 sleeping rooms, day room space and counseling rooms, and an adjacent outdoor recreation yard  A two-story 9800 square foot building with three classrooms on the first floor and staff showers, lockers and administrative offices on the second floor  A 5000 square foot multipurpose gymnasium In all, the expansion added 24,000 square feet to the original 18,000 square foot facility along with 20 more beds. Ten additional beds were included in the design but were not built. OPERATING THE HALL – WHAT IT COSTS Hall operating costs were $5.9 million during fiscal year 2015-16, the year before the expansion came on line. General fund costs were $4.7 million; $1.2 million was paid from other sources. See Table 1 in the Appendix. Most of the costs to operate the Hall are due to required staffing which, because of California’s Title 15 requirements, cannot easily flex based on the daily census. These costs are generally fixed. So, as the number of youth decreases, the cost per youth increases. The fiscal year 2015-16 cost 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 48 Juvenile Hall was $702 per day per youth based on the average daily population of 23 youth. Had the Hall been at capacity, the cost would have been $359 per day per youth. Staffing requirements aside, the larger infrastructure will require additional custodial and maintenance services. The County’s fiscal year 2016-17 budget reported that facility services costs are projected to increase going forward due to the Hall’s expansion. The new square footage will also increase the Hall’s utility bills. Therefore, in future years, the annual cost to operate the Hall will be greater than before the expansion occurred. THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM The expansion made the Hall more modern and spacious, with improved facilities to better meet the needs of youth and staff. The opportunity to add 24,000 square feet to the Hall and pay just one-third of the cost probably will not come again. But the question is whether, as of today, the need exists for this substantial increase in beds. Like other juvenile halls throughout California,11 the Hall includes beds that have been going empty. Hall Population Trends – Up, Then Way Down Things looked different in 2002 when consultants prepared a needs assessment to help the County look out to the year 2030. The assessment projected County juvenile justice and delinquency trends including the number of youth likely to spend time in the Hall. The study noted the Hall had suffered from overcrowding during the 1990s, peaking in 1995 when the Hall’s average daily population of 44 youth exceeded the 40-bed capacity the Hall had at the time. Use of the Hall moderated after 1995. The Hall’s average daily population declined for a time; by 2000 the average daily population was 33. By 2001 bed capacity had increased to 45 and, the report noted, overcrowding had been largely eliminated. Nevertheless, the study concluded the Hall’s average daily population would to grow to at least 71 by 2030 driven largely by expected growth in the County’s youth population. In 2015, California county juvenile detention facilities had capacity for 13,007 youth, an average daily population of 6,926 youth, and space available for 6,081 youth. 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 49 Juvenile Hall The County commissioned another needs assessment in 2007 to support its request for State funds to help build a bigger Hall. Consultants found the Hall significantly crowded—the Hall’s average daily population was 48 that year. The study recommended 30 more beds but noted that County growth and juvenile crime trends did not support adding more than 30 beds. The County was successful in its request for $13.1 million in State funding. But by fiscal year 2010-11, when the Board directed staff to move ahead with the expansion project, trends were starting to go in the other direction. Bookings into the Hall decreased 47 percent between fiscal years 2010-11 and 2015-16. The Hall’s average daily population decreased 38 percent. Filings by the DA’s office charging juveniles with a criminal offense decreased 64 percent. See Table 2 in the Appendix. An in-depth discussion regarding the reasons for fewer bookings, more empty beds and fewer juvenile criminal charges is beyond the scope of this report. However, no research the Grand Jury has reviewed suggests these trends will reverse within the foreseeable future. A dramatic slowing in the County’s juvenile population growth rate12 , declining juvenile crime rate13 , increased emphasis on prevention and early intervention, and reluctance to use incarceration when other less- restrictive sanctions are available—all of this suggests the Hall's underutilization could be a long- term truth. Could the Trend Reverse? This is not to say the Grand Jury has a crystal ball. It is possible the pendulum will swing the other way at some point and, should it do so, it is good the County has a juvenile hall ready to house a larger youth population. The County’s juvenile population, age 10 to 17 years, is expected to grow, on average, only one-quarter of one percent each year during the next 40 years. See Table 3 in the Appendix. The Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act requires all California counties to report on the annual county arrest rate per 100,000 juveniles age 10 to 17. These reports indicate the County’s juvenile arrest rate dropped 55% between 2010 and 2014. 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 50 Juvenile Hall  The County's youth population could grow significantly more than the State of California Department of Finance has estimated. A larger youth population could cause youth crime to go up even if the overall youth crime rate remained the same or went down.  More youth crime could occur even without significant growth in the County’s youth population. Gangs pushing through the County’s borders could cause youth gang-related criminal behavior to increase. The economy could plunge again and motivate more youth to commit property theft. Laws that de-criminalized certain youth behavior or reduced felonies to misdemeanors could be repealed.  The County’s juvenile court could change its current philosophy which is oriented toward rehabilitation, and order more youth locked up.  The charging pattern of the DA’s office could change. More youth could be charged with a crime enhancement that would require incarceration.  Probation’s philosophy could change when a successor replaces the department’s current chief. A new chief could be less interested in using early intervention and diversion with youthful offenders and more inclined to recommend detention in the Hall. And, although outside the scope of this report, new legislation including AB 403 and Proposition 57 could cause Hall usage to increase. AB 403 reduces reliance on group homes for long-term placement of youthful offenders. Proposition 57 requires that, before youth can be transferred to adult court, they must have a hearing in juvenile court to determine whether they should be transferred. REPURPOSING PART OF THE HALL – THE ACADEMY Not a New Idea At the same time adding 20 beds was being planned, so was repurposing one of the old facility’s three 15-bed units. It was not a new idea. Repurposing part of the Hall had been on Probation's radar for years. In fact, in 1999, the Board gave Probation the go-ahead to apply for a license to run a group home within the Hall in one of the 15-bed units, seeing the lack of a residential treatment program as a gap in youth services. The Board was told detention staff would maintain a population of up to 30 youth in the other two units of the Hall and that staffing needs in the Hall would remain the same. (The average daily population during fiscal years 1997 and 1998 had been 28, so freeing up 15 of the facility’s 45 beds was not seen as an issue.) The group home was ultimately not developed. 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 51 Juvenile Hall The average daily detention population increased and took up the housing Probation had hoped to use for the group home program. Trying it Again Once the expansion was done, Probation told the Board, one of the Hall’s existing housing pods would be used as a treatment center. Part of the justification for the build-out was that adding 20 high-security detention beds, with room to add 10 more beds in the future, would free up 15 beds in the Hall’s east unit for a treatment center. The lack of a treatment center was identified as a service weakness in the County’s Comprehensive Multi-Agency Juvenile Case Plan. The term “repurposed” was used to describe the treatment center. The Board was told the Hall’s expansion would allow “existing space to be repurposed to provide treatment programs that keep juveniles in County and out of group homes.” Probation would recommend the youth who would be suitable, but program participation would be court-ordered. The program would treat offenders in the 14 to 17 age range with behavioral, mental health or addiction problems. Its treatment models would target identified at-risk factors to rehabilitate participants in a secure setting. It would reduce the number of youthful offenders sent to group homes located largely outside the County. Probation would be able to house and treat offenders within the local community and closer to their families rather than transporting them to facilities far away. Probation did extensive preparation for the program’s implementation by:  Creating a workgroup to design the program  Employing the University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute to develop the program’s substance abuse treatment and cognitive behavioral therapy curriculum  Researching in-custody treatment program best practices and principles  Visiting in-custody treatment programs in Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Orange counties and a program in Portland, Oregon  Consulting and coordinating with Family Care Network, the outside treatment provider under contract to provide most of the program’s therapeutic services 2 016-2017 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Final Report 52