Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08051997 - D3 F&HS-02 SE..�. To: BOARD OF SliPERVISORS ��-, -F��•; Contra FROM: FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Costa County DATE: July 14, 1997 IffoVµ SUBJECT: REPORT ON THE WORK OF THE JUVENILE SYSTEMS PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. RECEIVE a presentation at the Board meeting on July 22, 1997 from the County Probation Officer and members of the Juvenile Systems Planning Advisory Committee (JSPAC) on JSPAC's past history, present activities and future plans. 2. ENDORSE the future focus of JSPAC, specifically on the replacement of juvenile hall, expansion of the Ranch, establishment of a program for girls which parallels the Summit Center, and the expansion of electronic monitoring. 3. AUTHORIZE the Family and Human Services Committee to meet with the Probation Officer and member of JSPAC at the Juvenile Hall on September 22, 1997 at 2:30 P.M. to review the impact of the State and County Budgets on juvenile probation services, tour the Lions Gate facility and receive an update from JSPAC on their activities and future plans. 4. REAFFIRM the Board's support for placing a,juvenile facilities bond act on the ballot statewide in 1998 and AUTHORIZE the Family and Human Services Committee and JSPAC to develop a strategy to support the passage of such a bond measure. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE ��Q�� OTHER SIGNATURE(S): "W DE)NN_ ER ACTION OF BOARD ON _ August 5 , 1997 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _ X OTHER X _ See the attached Addendum for board action. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE — UNANIMOUS(ABSENTi i � AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: _NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County Administrator ATTESTED August 5 , 1997 County Probation Officer PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF George Roemer, Senior Deputy County Administrator SUPERVISORS A D COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR I)LA Lr M382 (10/88) B ,DEPUTY F&HS-02 BACKGROUND: On November 5, 1996, the Board of Supervisors referred to our Committee the responsibility to provide ongoing liaison and oversight to the work of the Juvenile Systems Planning Advisory Committee (JSPAC). On July 14, 1997, our Committee met with the County Probation Officer, Terry Starr, Chris Adams, co-chair of JSPAC, members of JSPAC, staff from the County Administrator's Office, Rich Rose, a consultant to JSPAC and members of the 1997- 98 Grand Jury. Carol Kizziah from the County Administrator's Office noted that in the future staff support for JSPAC would come from the Probation Department, rather than the County Administrator's Office. Terry Starr, Chris Adams and others were very complimentary of the quality of staff support Ms. Kizziah and Mark Morris have provided to JSPAC. Chris Adams, co-chair of JSPAC, presented the attached report and reviewed it with our Committee. She focused on the future activities in which JSPAC intends to be involved. We endorse those activities and have recommended that the Board endorse them as well. Caroline Kelley, staff to the Policy Forum, noted that the Forum will be coordinating closely with JSPAC, particular the Safety Committee of the Policy Forum, which has much the same charge as does JSPAC. Mark Morris presented the attached report on the first year's operation of the SafeFutures Program and the plans for the second year. He warned that for the second year there is $160,000 in carryover funds from the first year of the grant, but that this carryover will not be available for the third year, even if the same level of grant is received for the third year. As a result, there will need to be either program reductions, an infusion of County General Funds or funds from some other source. Carol Hatch from Congressman Miller's Office, who is also a member of JSPAC noted the importance of keeping Lions Gate as a program facility for juveniles. She also noted the need for a girls program which parallels the Summit Center for boys. Supervisor DeSaulnier noted his interest in setting a strategy for future years to work on the bond act for juvenile facilities. Supervisor Gerber noted her support for additional programs for girls. Our Committee plans to meet at Juvenile Hall in September and to tour Lions Gate as well as receive additional updates from JSPAC and the Probation Officer. At that time we will know whether the bond measure has been placed on the ballot by the Legislature and what the impact of the County Budget has been on the Probation Department. -2- ADDENDUM TO ITEM D.3 Agenda August 5, 1997 The Board considered the report presented by Claude Van Marter, Assistant County Administrator, regarding the Juvenile Systems Planning Advisory Committee's (JSPAC) activities. Terry Starr, County Probation Officer, offered a brief report on the proposed probation system projects, and the active role JSPAC is playing in the those projects. He also noted that future implementation of the projects looks grim with the lack of state funding. Supervisor DeSaulnier stated that the members of the Family and Human Services Committee were enthusiastic about the planned projects, but are concerned that the political reality of Sacramento will impact future project decisions. Supervisor DeSaulnier suggested that a letter be sent to the state legislators restating the County's concerns relative to juvenile program resources, and the proposed juvenile bond act. Phil Batchelor, County Administrator, advised that his office could fax a letter from the Chair of the Board, restating the County's position on the juvenile budget impacts and the juvenile bond act. Mark Morris, SafeFutures Program, presented a short report, and noted that the staff of SafeFutures is determined to maintain their commitments even with funding cuts. Supervisor Rogers moved the recommendations of JSPAC and the County Probation Officer, and amended the language in Recommendation 4 substituting the words, "...AUTHORIZE the Family and Human Services Committee and JSPAC to develop a strategy to support the passage of such a bond measure", with the words "...AUTHORIZE the Family and Human Services Committee and JSPAC to help plan such a bond measure." Supervisor Gerber seconded the motion. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that Recommendation Nos. 1 (as amended relative to the presentation date of August 5, 1997), 2 and 3 are APPROVED; Recommendation No. 4 is APPROVED as amended; and the County Administrator is AUTHORIZED to fax a letter to State Legislators from the Chair, Board of Supervisors, restating the County's position on program funding and the proposed juvenile bond act. Probation Department Contra Terrence Starr COUNTY PROBATION OFFICER Administrative Offices Costa 50 Douglas Drive, Suite 201 County Martinez,California 94553-8500 510 313-4180 s e t (510)313-4191 FAX n, ' X JSPAC -Page 2 which was approved by the Board and started in early 1995, and an OJJDP grant which has provided vocational training for Orin Allen youth. Additionally, JSPAC was instrumental in helping the county secure one of only six OJJDP SafeFuture grants in November of 1995. That grant money has been used to set up the Summit placement program, a gang intervention program, Volunteers in Probation, case management for the young men leaving Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility, and for a mentoring program for girls. The estimate is that JSPAC has been directly responsible for some $10.5 million in funds being made available to Contra Costa County in its efforts to deal with at-risk youngsters in the juvenile justice system. A document prepared by Carol Kizziah was included with your initial packet. Present Time JSPAC continues to meet every month and one is struck by the stick-to-itiveness of the people involved and the high energy level as JSPAC tries to make a positive difference in the community. The Probation Department has become much more active with JSPAC and is providing staffing at this point for the various JSPAC committees. There is a feeling of rededication among JSPAC members and an interest in refocusing on those tasks which have been identified as being important in the Juvenile Justice Continuum of Care. Future Focus and Activities At a day-long retreat on May 30, 1997, JSPAC members were enthusiastic about rededicating themselves to the following: 1. Juvenile Hall Replacement - This continues to be the single most important issue to JSPAC members, but with time has come the realization that a new juvenile hall cannot be built without some outside resources. JSPAC members, as private citizens, campaigned actively for Proposition 205 which would have made some $350 million available statewide for new juvenile hall construction. Unfortunately, that bond issue failed in November of 1996. There is a new bond measure that may be on the ballot in November of 1998 which would also put some $350 million into construction of juvenile halls throughout the state. As Contra Costa is acknowledged in a Youth Authority report to have one of the five worst juvenile halls in the state, it's not inconceivable that the county could apply for and receive a significant amount of bond dollars for new construction. While this is still the major focus for JSPAC, the realization is that we might be more effective in dealing with a less costly project which also impact this type of youth. JSPAC -Page 3 2. Expansion of the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility(OAYRF) - Currently, there are 74 youth in placement at Orin Allen on any given day. There are another 50 to 60 young men awaiting placement at Orin Allen, either in the Juvenile Hall or on electronic monitoring. There is a need for a slightly different program at Orin Allen to deal with the younger wards who are currently being sent to placement there. The CAO has encouraged staff to prepare a plan to add some 26 beds to the facility in a separate dorm which could serve the younger offender. Currently, the project costs for that project are approximately $1.2 million for construction. There are a number of possibilities for funding this facility and each of those is being vigorously pursued. It should be noted that it would cost about $700,000 on an annual basis to staff and program the extra 26 beds projected for the Ranch. 3. Programs for Girls - Currently, the Summit program is dealing with some 20 boys in a very structured, very intense six month program. There is no such program available for girls. This is being seen more and more as a real gap in the continuum of care and JSPAC is vitally interested in trying to develop similar opportunities for girls' programs. This is something that could be done in conjunction with other counties, but is certainly a badly needed resource at this point in time. 4. Expansion of Electronic Monitoring- Currently, the Probation Department has some 40 units available for electronic monitoring. This is a very effective program that has allowed for some control of the Juvenile Hall population while youngsters are closely monitored electronically. The CAO's office approved two additional officers in the spring of 1997 to expand this program and JSPAC has every hope that the expansion will continue on into the future and, indeed, that electronic monitoring can be expanded as far as it makes sense to take it. Electronic monitoring is cost effective, allows for the Juvenile Hall population to be controlled, gives parents a great deal of support, both from Probation staff and from the monitor itself, allows youngsters to stay in their own schools and allows youngsters to work out their problems without the necessity of being locked up. In addition to the focuses listed above, JSPAC is currently working with a membership committee to make certain there is broad representation, both ethnically and demographically. Additionally, subcommittees have been formed to work on risk assessment issues, including program evaluation, facility inspections, and system and oversight monitoring. Another subcommittee will work on comprehensive strategies with the task of developing processes and planning and with the idea of receiving technical assistance from a number of outside agencies. As the committee can see, JSPAC has been busy, is busy and will be busy trying to provide the Board and the community with the information it needs to make informed decisions as to how best to serve that portion of the juvenile population that is at risk, failing to become productive, happy adults. CA/TS:ds JSPAC/97Rept.61(2) OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Administration Building 651 Pine Street, 10`h Floor Martinez, California 94553 — ------------- o.. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECEIVED TO: Family and Human Services Committee JUL - 1997 of the Board of Supervisors FROM: Mark Morris, Project Director OFFICE OF SafeFutures L COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR DATE: July 9, 1997 SUBJECT: SafeFutures status, materials for 7/14 meeting The attached materials provide a brief summary of first year grant activities and of our proposal, now being reviewed by OJJDP, for the second year. PROGRAM ABSTRACT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SAFEFUTURES In its second year, Contra Costa County's SafeFutures will feature five programmatic components: 1) A prevention and family-strengthening program in three elementary schools in Richmond, designed to provide additional services to at-risk youth and their families, and after school, weekend, and summer programs for all youth in the schools. The program involves partnerships between the schools, adjacent community centers, and community based organizations. 2) A gang intervention program focusing on middle and high school youth in Richmond. This component will include intensive supervision and required attendance at school, vocational training, or employment for active delinquent gang members, specialized casework services for less criminally involved gang members, gang recognition training for school personnel, and conflict intervention/mediation in gang-related conflicts at the schools and in the community. Partner organizations are the Probation Department, the Richmond Police Department, local and county schools, and several community based organizations. 3) A locked mental health treatment unit, with aftercare and transition services, for 20 young males who are serious offenders and seriously emotionally disturbed. Most have failed other placements. This program is a collaborative effort by probation, mental health, and education. 4) Mentoring programs for teenage girls who have been incarcerated in Juvenile Hall and for elementary school girls who are deemed at risk of delinquency because of family problems, school performance and behavior problems, or substance abuse. 5) A series of initiatives to strengthen the organizational infrastructure of the County's continuum of care (or graduated sanctions). These include intensive aftercare case management for boys leaving commitment facilities and a Volunteers in Probation program. In all, these programs aim to directly enhance supervision and/or services for approximately 1,100 youth in the County and to recruit, train, and assign over 150 volunteer adults to assist in juvenile justice programs. In addition, the Contra Costa SafeFutures program will work with OJJDP's Comprehensive Strategies to develop a detailed long term plan for the development of a full range of sanctions and prevention, intervention, and treatment programs. IV. TARGET AREA AND POPULATION The following table summarizes the target areas and populations for the various Year II components. TARGET COMPONENT TARGET AREA POPULATION Family/schoollcommunity: Iron Triangle, Richmond: Case mana ement: 100+high prevention and family Coronado,Lincoln,and risk youth and families strengthening Nystrom elementary schools Intensive in home services: 75 high risk youth/families After school and other roup programs: 300+youth attending the target schools Gang intervention Richmond,especially Iron Core targetrg ouy (intensive Triangle area: middle and supervision/aftercare): 50 high schools active gang members returned from commitment facilities School based casework: 90 youth identified as gang affiliated Group meetings/services: 500 youth attending the target schools Summit Center Countywide 40 serious offenders, seriously emotionally disturbed; placement orders from Juvenile Court Mentoring—elementary Iron Triangle, Richmond: 30 girls identified as high risk school girls Coronado, Lincoln, and (family problems, school Nystrom elementary schools problems, substance abuse Mentoring—Juvenile Hall Countywide 20 girls,who have history of girls delinquency and ask for mentor Aftercare case management Countywide 150+youth leaving Orrin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility. Of these, 50 on specialized gang aftercare caseload Volunteers in Probation Countywide General services is assisting; probation: at least 100 youth Mentoring: 10 girls on Probation V. ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES Because our Year I accomplishments and challenges are described in considerable detail in later sections (and will be itemized thoroughly in our semiannual progress report to be submitted near the end of July 1997), the following provides an overview of Year I progress. Accomplishments During the first year, we achieved a very solid basis in all of our programmatic components. • Policies and procedures for all components were developed. • Essential linkages between agencies were established. The Family/School/ Community and Gang Intervention components in Richmond both developed close ties to the schools, to high praise from school officials. The Summit Center is now a strong collaboration between the Probation Department, Mental Health, and the County Office of Education. • We developed a good cadre of volunteer assistance to augment juvenile justice, through the mentoring programs and the Volunteers in Probation program. • A large number of at risk youth and families did receive services: • 100+boys received intensive aftercare case management when leaving the Orrin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility. • About 30 girls joined the mentoring programs. • Several hundred youth received services in the elementary, middle, and high schools in Richmond. (We are currently analyzing data, to develop unduplicated counts of youth receiving various service modalities.) • For at least half of the year, the Summit Center's 20 beds were full. There is already a waiting list for this program. Challenges The second year will, for the most part carry on the existing programs. However, programs and activities will be structured to respond to certain basic challenges that became evident during the first year. • We need to remember to keep our efforts focused on youth most at risk or most in need of supervision. In the gang intervention programs in particular, we will reconstitute our interventions to ensure that major efforts are directed at actively delinquent gang members. 1 • We need to keep reaching out to other agencies, expanding the scope of collaboration and linkage. For example, although we have strong ties to the Richmond schools, we will make concerted (and budgeted) efforts in Year II to bring in community centers, neighborhood councils, volunteers, and community organizations. In the gang intervention area, we will build on the good interaction we currently have with Probation, to achieve a similar level of cooperation with the Richmond Police Department. Likewise, the Summit Program and the Aftercare Case Management programs will both give more attention to linking with other service providers in the aftercare phase. • We have worked hard to implement the program components. The second year will be a time to step back and reexamine our assumptions and review whether our developing programs are the most cost-effective means to our goals. A major part of this reexamination process will be participation in the Comprehensive Strategies program. • We also identified a number of areas in which our information, and our information-sharing capabilities, still need improvement. Comprehensive Strategies will be of great assistance in thinking through what improvements we need to make. We will also fund additional crime analysis capabilities for the Richmond Police Department in the second year, and we will add a information specialist position to assist Comprehensive Strategies and other efforts to improve our information base. • We need also to begin serious discussions and exploration about how the various components will be sustained by alternative resources, to prepare for reallocations of portions of SafeFutures funding to other programs in the County and for the eventual end of the SafeFutures grant. • Finally, one very significant area of"unfinished business" is development of a full array of services for girls. The Juvenile Systems Planning Advisory Committee (JSPAC) has designated a subcommittee to look specifically at services for girls, and we hare initiated discussions within the County regarding a new girls treatment program that would be comparable to the Summit Center program for boys. 2 VI.' YEAR TWO GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Year II goals and objectives are listed in detail in later sections. The discussion here provides an overview of"where we hope to be at the end of the second year." Programmatic During Year II, our goals include: • provide significantly enhanced interventions (services, supervision, sanctions) for at least 1100 youth, most of them high risk, and their families; • develop a cadre of at least 150 adult volunteers (for mentoring and Volunteers in Probation)to augment juvenile justice resources for youth; • accomplish significant and measurable results with the youth and families with whom we work-lower crime rates, better school performance and attendance, better life skills and chances, and stronger families and caregivers; and • contribute to stronger neighborhoods and schools in the Iron Triangle area of Richmond, as evidenced by parent and other adult participation in school and community center activities, lower rates of violent and other incidents at schools, and closer ties between SafeFutures-funded agencies and other organizations and agencies. Planning By the end of Year II, we hope to achieve the following: • complete the Comprehensive Strategies process, and have at least a preliminary draft of a detailed long term plan for additions or changes to our existing continuum of care; • complete a plan specifically for development of programs and services for girls (consistent with the overall Comprehensive Strategies); • develop concrete implementation strategies for day treatment/day reporting programs for all appropriate youth, and for a mental health treatment unit for girls(consistent with the overall Comprehensive Strategies); • agree upon a strategy to improve our information systems regarding youth and family services, including youth in the justice system; and • identify strategies for on-going funding of SafeFutures components and programs. 1 r Management and organization During the second year, we will develop the following capabilities related to management and organization of SafeFutures: • a consistent reporting system regarding clients served and activities,,to be used by the local evaluators and SafeFutures managers to assess our progress and success in reaching programmatic objectives; • mechanisms in each of the SafeFutures components' management groups to encourage on-going accountability to objectives and outcomes; and • involvement by a wider range of partners—key leaders at the policy-making level, and agencies, programs, associations, community groups, and youth at the program implementation level. 2