HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08122008 - D.3 (2) TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
FROM: PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE Costa
o• ;.
DATE: AUGUST 4 2008 County
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL BY THE SHERIFF TO PARTICIPATE WITH STATE PAROLE TO
ADMINISTER AN IN-CUSTODY DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAM
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract, upon approval by the
County Administrator, with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to
provide low- and medium-security flexible jail bed space to the state to implement a joint in-custody drug
treatment program for state parolees, from the period beginning with contract approval through June 30,
2011.
FISCAL IMPACT
As proposed, there will be no,cost to the County to provide this program. The state will provide lull
funding to establish and operate the hi-Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICD"ITP). Funding for the 1CDTP
has.been established through the State,General Fund, facilitated by the stipulation in the federal district
court (Valdivia v. S'chivarzenegger).
At frill capacity, the program could generate up to $2.5 million annually, which will offset the program
administration and staff costs, with any remaining balance requested to be applied to immediate jail
improvements and needs,jail remodeling, security upgrades, and future jail expansion costs.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: ® YES SIGNATURE:
❑ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ® RECOMMENDATION 6F BOARD COMMITTEE
®APPROVE ❑ OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)-
ACTION OF BOARD ON i
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDEDE?"
OTHER F-1
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:. ATTESTED: AUGUST 12,2008
Contact: MICHAEL NEWMAN (510)2624225 JOHN CULLEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
cc: SHERIFF-CORONER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR
By: puty
Proposal for In-Custody Drug Treat Program in Contra Costa County August 4, 2008
Page 2
BACKGROUND
The 60-70% rate of recividism in the state and in this county' is of grave concern. The Board of Supervisors
has previously expressed interest in prevention programs to help curtail the staggeringly high recidivism
rate. To that end, the Office of the Sheriff has collaboratively sought out partnerships to develop and
implement new programs to help achieve this goal and positively impact the adult criminal justice system.
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is authorized to establish a substance
abuse treatment control unit per sections 11560 and 11563 of the California Penal Code. In a stipulation by
the federal district court in the Valdivia ins. Sc/nvarzenegger case, dated April 3, 2007, the CDCR was
ordered to incrementally expand the In-Custody Drug Treatment Program from 288 beds to 1,800 beds
statewide by April 1, 2008. To help expedite this expansion, CDCR wishes to contract with local
jurisdictions throughout the state for bed space. The Sheriff has developed a proposal to take advantage of
the State's need for jail beds.
On April 22, 2008, the Board referred to the Public Protection Committee a review of the Sheriff's
proposal. Our Committee met with the Sheriff and his staff on .May 23, June 16, and August 4 to discuss
and gain a better.understanding of the proposal and to consider concerns raised by the Health Services
Department with regard to the efficacy of the ICDTP and its potential impact on community-based drug
treatment bed capacity. .
The In-Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICDTP) is a resource thatassists in the CDCR's goal of reducing
recidivism, and also serves as a remedial sanction in lieu of a return to custody for parolees who have
violated their conditions of parole. Placement into ICDTP is intended for parolees who have committed
violations as a result of drug- or alcohol-related dependency, and/or who have a need for a period of
confinement and treatment to get their substance abuse under control. The program serves a different
population than re-entry programs in that re-entry programs target state prisoners in the last 6-12 months of
their sentences, while the drug treatment program targets parolees that are already living within Contra
Costa communities.
All placements in ICDTP are voluntary, must be approved by the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) and in
accordance with criteria established by the Office of the Sheriff, and will not constitute a break in parole.
The parolee will remain eligible for discharge consideration per Penal Code (PC) Section 3001.. The
ICDTP operates under Health and Safety Code sections 11561 (male), and 11563 (female), which allow the
BPH to place a person in an in-custody drug treatment program, in non-revoked status, for up to 90 days,
when there are reasonable grounds to believe that lie or she is addicted or habituated, or in imminent danger
of being addicted or habituated to controlled substances or alcohol.
Of the parolee candidates offered this program in this county, priority consideration will first be given to
those having a resident address in Contra Costa County. Additional benefits to the County may follow as
the program expands to the County inmate population, at no additional County cost. This prograrn has
shown promise in some cases by reducing the recidivism rate by 20%.
The Division of Adult Parole Operations (DAPO) in cooperation with the Division of Addiction and
1 California Department of Corrections
Proposal for In-Custody Drug Treat Program in Contra Costa County August 4, 2008
Page 3
Recovery Services (DABS) manage and operate two ICDTP models; a jail-based and community-based
drug treatment programs. The state will provide teachers to facilitate the instruction of the program, and a
facility-assigned State Parole Agent to supervise the parole program. The following program descriptions
further identify the phases of treatment for both models:
♦ Jai!-Based ICDTP- Phase I is a 60-day, in-custody, cognitive behavioral, drug treatment phase that is
accomplished through contracts between county jails and DAPO. The Contra Costa County Office of
Education provides enhanced cognitive behavioral curriculum during this phase. Phase II is a 30-day
residential aftercare treatment phase provided by community-based organizations contracted through
the Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agencies (SASCA). Phase III is 60-days of outpatient
treatment that consists of referrals to Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), Narcotics Anonymous (NA),
aftercare groups, etc. Parolees may also continue in residential treatment for some or all of Phase 111 if
they agree to do so and funding is available.
♦ Coiumunity-Based ICDTP- Phase I is a 90-day residential treatment phase provided by community-
based organizations contracted through the SASCA. Phase 1.1 is 60-days of outpatient treatment that
consists of referrals to AA,NA, aftercare groups, etc. Parolees may also continue in residential
treatment for some or all of Phase III if they agree to do so and funding is available.
The Sheriff proposes to implement the Jail-Based ICDTP. At our Committee meetings, the Health Services
Department raised concerns about the efficacy of the ICDTP curriculum versus individualized drug
treatment services. The ICDTP curriculum is geared towards drug users with a criminal history. This
curriculum has been recommended by the state for this target population in an effort to break the cycle of
criminal activity. Clinical drug treatment services are not a funded component of the ICDTP. The impact
of the program on available community-based treatment beds is unknown. However, the parolees being
served by the ICDTP are County residents and part of the population to be served by community-based
treatment programs. As the ICDTP is a state-administered program, participants may be routed out of
Contra Costa County to receive community-based drug treatment services if no capacity exists within our
county.
Our Committee supports the Sheriff's proposal and recommends approval. The County Administrator's
Office is working with the Office of the Sheriff and County Risk Management to evaluate the state's
proposed contract language and request modifications, if warranted.
Requested Action of the Committee
In Custody Drug Treatment Program
Contra Costa County The office of the Sheriff requests that the Committee support,approve and move
forward the partnership with the Department of Rehabilitation by authorizing the
Sheriff-Coroner,or his designee,to enter into contract with the California Departrnent
... „•,,,.,„,,,,...,,., of Corrections Rehabilitation.The purpose of this contract would be to provide excess
low and medium-security jail bed space to the state,to create a joint rehabilitation
Program for both State and County inmatesal no additional cost to tt a L_OtL
A collaborative partnership to shift the way we
manage non-violent felony inmates This contract will allowauthorize the Sheriff to provide ninety beds of secum housing
for qualifying ICDTP parolees for up to 60 days.Of the Parolee candidates that qualify
and are offered this program, irio consider tion will first f>e given to those having a
resident address in Contra Costa County.W the beds provided,sixty beds will be for
Warren E. Rupf,Sheriff males and thirty beds will be for females.Additionally,current county inmates will be
BY.Captain Migrael F.Newnan
allowed to access this program.
Custody Services Bureau
What is an
In Custody Drug Treatment Program
(ICDTP) Current County.Participants-Secure Housing
The ICDTP operates under Health and Safety Code Sections 11561(male),and Orange County 128 beds
11563(female).These sections allow the Prison Board(BPH)to place a person 9 t
into an in-custody drug treatment program,in non-revoked status,for up to 90
days,when there am reasonable gmunds to believe that he or she is addicted . Kern County 128 beds
or habituated, or in imminent danger of being addicted or habituated to
controlled substances or alcohol: . Santa Clara County 100 beds
Jail-Based ICDTP . Tulare County 100 beds
Phase I is a 60-day,in-custody,cognitive behavioral,drug treatment phase that
is compnsed of an intensive classroom curriculum,taught treatment
a week for 6 . Merced County 50 beds
hours a day.This program is accomplished through specific contracts between
county jails,the State and the Contra Costa County Office of Education,who . Chula Vista 36 beds
P=, enhanced cognitive behavioral curriculum during this phase.
. Del Norte County 30 beds
Phase II is a 30-day community bed(non-secure)placement program.
work?
R:x-
How does it
Why Participate ;. Provide Security
.....,..._._w___ ......_. ._............................. supervision and
.. c._.. Inmate
Selection Criteria Bed Space
Improved efficiency capability of current jail system operations at multiple ,sW,N�,,, •Mr�M^m
facilities
Zero cost to County,program is funded by the State,via daily jail inmate rate outcome:
More economical use of existing available low-medium bed space, potentialImproved Public
modest revenue source safety.Decreased
Potential to decrease the recidivism rate in Contra Costa CountyRecidivism
Potential reduction impact on the long term county jail population
Contra Costa currently has 150 community based beds(non secure housing)for �^,ice•
drug treatment programs contracted to the state Provide core
Classroom
A current snap shot of the county jailpopulation-2088,identified that 1581 of Education Curriculum
those inmates were In custodyfor a drug and or alcohol offense. (Based on
population information April 2008,similar monthly averages are consistent)
Over 600 parolees per year are released to Contra Costa County from State -- '
• insUtubons annually-all crimes upon successfulcompletlonaf the In custody Phnefti0 days naxbnan)
oeerxmlty Lastl phase fcoaxy d Mg.)by the ParoleAgent
County IMPACT Local IMPACT
The program site locations being oflered am current medium and minimum
The ICDTP program should be viewed as being an a0tl on type program,with custody facilities operated by the Sheriff's Office.Both are secure)ail facilities
[he current)all systems operation remaining static whether or not tilts program slid are operated in a legally correct,constitutionally sound and safe manner.
is initialized Therefore,the additional impart of this program,both fiscally and Both have specific criteria for placement at each site and this criteria will not
operationally will be minimum,with some impact being absorbed change with the addition of this program.
Staffing Communities or cities near the location of the custody facilities:
le'.aprogram wi requne Three Add ur-1 Deputy Sheriffs and require minimal but some
ganlanrad risbabve duties.Two at MCDF,One at WCDF.Funtlrrg sauce revenues west County Detention Facility WCDF;
rel ed.
City of Richmond,Parches[er Village
Facility
Both site laabon6 have rdCnbfied the required space for seared housing,dassman Marsh Creek Detention Facility MCDF;
insrucbon space and office,space far one Parole Agent antl three teachers. Cities of Clayton and Concord,Unincorporated Clayton
Food,doming and maintenance per mdiwdual inmate.Funding source revenues recaved.
These titles and communities will not experience any additional impact,risk or
Operations safety concems placed upon them as a result of this program.Ultimately,the
Transpatatien,nxfine medial are,inmate management/s4terwsion.Furd:rg sante programs success may improve public safety, in these and other cities, by
revenues racervatl. reducing the re-offender rate of those released on parole back to Contra Costa
County,(currently at over 600 parolees per year).
Cost Impact " Potential Revenue Impact
Staffing
Three Deputy Shenf.s m`a maAnn.m cost per year S 183,949 =$551,847 The State has identified and negotiated a daily jail rate with
Management Admnrsbabve costs absorbed.
participating Counties of$77.17 per inmate per day.
. Facility
Programming costs/space and instructionS 00 Total daily jail late per inmate $77.17
Food,clothing and maimenance per mdmdual inmate per day 5 6.40
Far Ninety inmates pe'day 5 576.00 Total potential revenue per day(90 inmates) $6,945
Total potential revenue per month(90 inmates) $215,295
Operations Total potential revenue per year(90 inmates) $2,535,034
Transportaban costs will be absorbed as routine travel currently
urs between faciini antl is ane way only $00
Rlwbtie medal tale daily rate per inmate(actual 07/08) $27.00 '
inmate management/supe—m/oversight(sex staffing above) $00
Total Potential Cos[Impact Pv Year =$1,649,037
Total Potential Cost Per Month =S 137,419
Total Potential Cost Per Day =$4,432
- .�.:. Incremental Cost Analysis Detail z . .. Incremental Cost Analysis Continued
2150 FOOD
(induces all nutriments&beverages for human consumption)
AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION(ADP) 52.095,000 = S.1,318.79 = $3.61 Food Cost Per InmateDay
1,581 365
April 1449. Dec. 1582 Sept. 1618
Feb. 1514 Nov. 1662 Aug. 1610 2160 CLOTHING
Jan. 1564 Co. 1613 July 1618 (includes all clothing,personal wppLes,tnifom6,Pont-ware,ex.)
3_S3LBt.i4.= $336.91 $0.92 Clothing Cost P Inmate Day
11230 1581 365
9(mo.) = 1581 ADP .
2170 HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES
(lrXJudes all bedding,laundry,and genual hon hold supplies.Mattresses,cleaning supplies,
FORMULA USED FOR COMPUTAIONS toilet tissue,detergents,garbage drsposal,etc.)
Annual Budget 5.=AnrivaLCQSLECLInmate=Cost Per inmate Day $1.079.979 =S 6e3.10 = $1.87 Household Expanse Cost Per Inmate Day
ADP 365 days 365
TOTAL INCREMENTAL COST:
Food 5 3.61
Clothing 5.92
Maneh0ld$1.87
Total Day
e
Labor Detail Analysis Cost Vs. Revenue Chart
Labor Costs -
Co•Vs Revenue Chan
Includes costs for 3 deputy.sheriffs, all other labor costs remain
unchanged, i.e. cooks, detention service workers (DSW), clerical, °00C -------------------
require O additional staffing ��
Annual cost for 1 deputy sheriff including benefits:$183,949.38 ..-....... =
Labor cost per day$1,511.90
Projected Revenues
I
$77.17,daily per inmate
• $3,472.65,daily per 45 inmates A. --
• $6,945.30,daily per 90 inmates •°° - —
Cost Analysis Conclusion : Indirect Revenue Benefit
The Inmate Welfare Fund (IWF-established by the Penal Cade)assists to
Projecting a fill ratio of approximately 25 state parolees(less than 1/3 provide funding to inmate programs, educational
programs, training and
of the proposed contracted beds)the program operates at zero cost. vocational training to inmates in the jail system. Inmates that utilize the
Of the current contracted beds in the seven other counties the bed rill commissary service and inmate telephone service assist in generating modest
ratio has been approximately 90%. revenue for the IWF fund.On average,this equals$100 and 6130,respectively
a month.
Above the fill ratio of approximately 25 beds, the program can
generate a positive/modest revenue stream. Goth facilities will allow the program inmate to participate in the purchasing of
comrtiissary and the atter to telephones. This could potentially bring in
$]S,000 to$20,700 directly to the IWF fund,which would be used in the county
jail system to pay for additional or the expansion of current programs,education
and training for the county jail inmate population.
Discussion Points
Questions Worth Discussion . Attachments 1-10
What happens if it cost money to operate the program?
What happens if the State runs out of marey>
What happens if the jail population expands and we need the bed space?
What happens if we don'treceive payment?
What happens if we don't want to participate anymore?
What do we really gain from participating?
Are we liable for anything?
Can we refuse acceptance of someone the send us?
. Questions?
3
OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF
Warren E. Rupf
Contra Costa County ';`�,;c�
Sheriff
Custody Services Bureau
5555 Giant Highway
Richmond, CA 94806 ~
(510) 262-4225 Fax (510) 262-4299
Date: July 14, 2008
To: Julie Enea, Senior Deputy County Administra or
From: Joseph P. Caruso, Commander CS:7 ..
By: Michael F. Newman, Captain CSB�u,,.r
.. r
Subject:. Community Outreach Report- In Custody Drug Treatment Program
On June 16, 2008, the Public Protection Committee requested the Sheriff to conduct community
outreach with selected area leaders. This outreach was in'regards to the introduction of an In
Custody.Drug Treatment Program Partnership with the State of California and the County Office
of Education.
The outreach information was well received and as a result, only one further inquiry was
recorded. That inquiry came from the Brentwood Police Department. After contacting the agency
they were in strong support of the described program.
No other inquiries, expressed concern, opposition or additional information has been requested
of this office regarding this program.
"Professionalism,Security and Service"
7%7/2008 Mike Newman -20080702193527247. df — - –_ Page 1
County of Contra Costa
3 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
I MEMORANDUM
DATE: JULY 2,2008
TO: WARREN•E.RUFF,Sheriff-Coroner
Attn: Joseph Caruso,Commander,Custody Services Bureau
FROM: PUBLIOPROTECTION COMMITTEE(Supervisors Gioia and Glover)
By IE ENEA,Senior Deputy County Administrator
SUBJECT: CO UNITY OUTREACH ON THE SHERIFF'S PROPOSAL TO
IMP EMENT AN IN-CUSTODY DRUG ABUSE TREATMENT PROGRAM
At the June 16 Public Protection Committee meeting,the Sheriff agreed to conduct community
outreach by meeting with the.leaders of the cities of Antioch,Oakley,and Brentwood,and those'
West County communities in the vicinity of the West County Detention Facility,and provide a
report summarizing those outreach efforts at the Committee's next meeting on July 21. The
goals of the outreach effort are to advise the local communities of the proposed program and why .
the program is_needed,and to distinguish the program from there-entry proposal that was
previously rejected by the Board of Supervisors.
Please provide your written outreach report to me no later than July 14 for inclusion in the
Committee meeting packet.
Jul, 15. 2008 . 4:49PM . Sup: Susan Bonilla 925-646-5202 , No. 3625'--P. 2+r-
Wtroa = v. ,
�v •c0 rb
"
� .
d
rG �• b ca
61 011
ro it
AO
p..rt Pa CL Z z! c7
o' d O ..fa'. ?• ,: .r3 h�y ., rJ � w o �+
ta
;.„�,:ro `�.��•.� L1.. �.5, rte+-�S �C t°
•� r�r�a to ..�n ro,ro :. era, � � w .� � a, p� Q �' � � co �y ,, a' O� a '� �; � �..
R; d
Ft to•. ra m
2 'a a
C3 0
.b
E;_
o d Rw. $ Cf' t� O '.
Q � O.`*�' td �.'�Kr�CC�'.-' � °± '�, .7 �i �1. rOiti � .os• _.. 1
tr
tuna
:�j 0. rd
'�ebD •�dp t� S� roar:. �'ro'; o "+ Q �^t
EA:tv EL
. M
0 t7
,rpt0,
cl. N a. `Cj �� ` o,ebed! p n d
tv
d+ r- tro+ R O rr� �� Q
•R+ Fs 0 J O i° d (� i t �' 0 d �
F`ye, G
y Cr ro Com' p O r~n w
C1 *.d
§
h J n
rn
.
HAVEN FEARN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DIRECTOR ALCOHOL AND OTHER
• � :__�:.;..;_�,�� DRUG SERVICES
597 Center Ave: Suite 320
CONTRA COSTA Martinez, CA 94553
Ph (925) 313-6350
HEALTH SERVICES Fax (925) 313-6307
Date: August 4,2008
To: Contra Costa County Public Protection Committee
John Gioia, Supervisor District 1 Federal Glover, Supervisor District 5
Chair, CCC Public Protection Committee Member;CCC Public Protection Committee
11780 San Pablo Avenue, 4D 315 E. Leland Road
El Cerrito, CA 94530 Pittsburg, CA 94565
From: Haven Feam,Director,Alcohol&Other Drug Services
Re: Comments on the Office.of the Sheriffs Proposal to Establish a Joint State-County In-Custody
Drug Abuse Treatment and Rehabilitation Program
The Alcohol and Other Drugs Services Division (ADDS) of the Health Services Department commends
and supports the Sheriff's proposal for highlighting the following concerns:
• The high rate of re-imprisonment for county residents paroled from state prisons.
• The large contribution to re-'imprisonment made by drug and alcohol abuse problems.
• The risks to community well being due to high drug and alcohol related recidivism.
AODS also supports the Sheriff's proposal to move toward solutions as follow:
• The commitment to rehabilitate county residents in the community whenever possible.
• The focus on alcohol and other drug treatment.as a key component of rehabilitation.
• The need to find solutions that are entirely state-funded with no net county costs.
AODS poses the following questions with respect to the Sher'iff's proposal:
.• For the first in-custody phase, is it anticipated that classes teaching alcohol and drug information
will produce outcomes (i.e. successes)that are comparable to treatment?
• For the last out-of-custody phase is it anticipated that referral to AA, NA, and other self-help will
produce outcomes that are comparable to (outpatient).treatment?
• Since adopting "no one size fits all" improves outcomes (CSAC attachment, p.3, and CDCR's
DARS Division website), how will the classes do individual assessments, linkages with services
and placement in appropriate treatment programs upon release?
Contra Costa Alcohol and Other Drug Services•Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services•Contra Costa Environmental Health•Contra Costa Health Plan
Contra Costa Hazardous Materials•Contra Costa Mental Health•Contra Costa Public Health•Contra Costa Regional Medical Center.Contra Costa Health Centers
Contra Costa County Public Protection Committee
Re: Comments on the Office of the Sheriff's Proposal
to Establish a Joint State-County In-Custody
Drug Abuse Treatment and Rehabilitation Program
July 21, 2008
Page 2
• For the out-of-custody phase, will there be new state funds (e.g., through AB900 or through the
State's SASCA) to expand our community.treatment slots and beds, or will this proposal
increase demand on existing capacity (CSAC attachment, p.4)?
• If there is no new community treatment capacity, will parolees displace county residents in
existing slots and beds for financial reason, since community residents' treatment is paid for at a
county rate that is lower than the state parole rate?
• Further, if there is no new community treatment capacity, will county residents be less likely to
enter existing county-funded treatment for reasons of stigma and comfort, since treatment will
have to be re-designed to meet parole's security rules and requirements?.
Contra Costa Alcohol and Other Drug Services•Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services•Contra Costa Environmental Health•Contra Costa Health Plan
Contra Costa Hazardous.Materials•Contra Costa Mental Health•Contra Costa Public Health•Contra Costa Regional Medical Center•Contra Costa Health Centers.
Corrections Reform
County Policy Principles and Guidelines • Page 3
further investment in multiagency programs authorized under SB 6181, which
are built on .proven, evidence-based strategies including.comprehensive pre-
sentence assessments, in-custody treatment, targeted case management,
and the development of an individualized life plan. These programs promote
a permanent shift in the way nonviolent felony offenders are.managed,
treated and released into their respective communities. Examples of
program elements that have been demonstrated to improve offenders'
chances for a successful reintegration into their communities upon release
from custody'include, but are not limited to, the following:
Early risks and needs assessment that incorporates assessments of the
need for treatment of alcohol and other drug abuse, and the degree of
need for literacy, vocational and mental health services;
�(c o In-custody treatment that is appropriate to each individual's needs —
no one-size-fits-all programming;
After care and relapse prevention services to maintain a "clean and
sober" lifestyle; .
Strong linkages to treatment, vocational training, and support services
in the community;.
r, Prearranged housing and employment (or vocational training) for,
offenders before release into their communities of residence;
r, Preparation of the community and offenders' families to receive and
support each offender's view law-respecting and productive.lifestyle
before release through counseling and public education that recognize
and address the inter-generational impact and cycles of criminal
justice system involvement.
Long-term mentorship and support from faith-based and other
community and cultural support organizations that will last-a lifetime,
not just the duration of the parole period; and
Community=based treatment options and sanctions.
Counties believe that such,reentry programs should include incentives for
inmate participation.
• Siting of new facilities. . Counties acknowledge that placement of
correctional facilities is controversial. However, the state must be sensitive
to community response to changing the use of, expanding, or siting new
correctional facilities (prisons, community correctional facilities, or reentry
facilities). Counties and other affected municipalities must be involved as
active participants,in planning and decision-making processes regarding site
selection. Providing for security and appropriate mitigations to the local
community are essential.
1 Chapter 603, Statutes of 2065.
California State Association of Counties
. 1100 K Sheet,suite 101•Sacramento,CA•95814
(916)327-756D-FAX:(916) 441-5507
Adopted November 30,2006 www.csac.countles.org
Corrections Reform.
County Policy Principles and Guidelines• Page4
Impact on local treatment capacity'. Counties and the state.must be aware of
the impact on local communities'existing treatment,;capacity (e.g., mental health,
drug treatment, vocational services, sex offender treatment) if the correction
reforms contemplate a major new demand on services as part of development of
community correctional facilities, 'reentry programs,:or.other locally based
programs. Specialized treatment services that are not widely available are likely
the first to be overtaxed. To prevent adverse impacts upon existing alcohol and
drug and mental health'treatment programs for primarily non-criminal justice
system participants, treatment-capacity shall be increased to accommodate criminal
justice participants. In addition, treatment capacity!shall be separately developed
and funded.
Emerging and best practices. Counties support the development and
implementation of a mechanism for collecting and sharing of best practices that can
help advance correction reform efforts.
California State Association of Counties
ISOR K Street,Suite 201-Sacramento,CAA-95B14
(916)327-7500•FAX:(916) 441-5507
Adopted November 30,2006 www.coc.counties.org
.r - Ra_._. _• .. - -
`�
re''
AWA
•
Neighborhood House 104 24
Diablo Valley Ranch 77 28
Ozanam Center 24 13
East County Center for Women 12 12
Pueblos del Sol 22 17
Wollam House 24 14
Ujima Rectory 12 1.0
Ujima La Casa 12 10
Ujima Corbin 6 6
Sunrise House -0- -0-
Discovery House 40 40
Total 333 176
HAVEN FEARN
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DIRECTOR
ALCOHOL AND OTHER
DRUG SERVICES
597 Center Ave. Suite 320
..
CONTRA COSTA Martinez, CA 94553
.............................................................................................................................. ........................................... Ph (925) 313-6350
HEALTH SERVICIS Fax (925) 313-6307
July 7, 2008
Mr. Robert Garner, Director
Santa Clara County
Department of Alcohol and Drug Services
976 Lenzen Avenue, 3'd Floor
San Jose, 95126
Dear Mr. -�her:
The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff has presented a proposal to the Board of
Supervisors calling for the establishment of a joint State/County in-custody drug abuse treatment
and rehabilitation program.. The proposal references seven (7) California Counties in which the
Office of the Sheriff's model and design is currently operating successfully. Your county, Santa
Clara, is listed among the seven with a bed capacity of 100.
The Sheriffs proposal is a collaboration between several'agencies including the California
Department of Corrections,and Rehabili'tation (CDCR), the Division of Adult Parole Operations
(DAPO), the Division of Addiction. and Recovery Services (DARS), and the Contra Costa
County Office of Education. The In-Custody Drug Treatment Program (ICDTP) is a jail-based
cognitive behavioral curriculum which is followed by community-based follow-up 30 days
residential with a possibility for extended stay, and outpatient treatment (ODF) identified in the
proposal as "AA, NA, aftercare groups, etc."
The jail-based phase has a. flexible bed space .capacity, but projects a discharge rate of ninety
(90) individuals, sixty (60),men.,and thirty (30) women into the community-based ICDTP. The
purpose.in my contacting you is to. request your assistance.by providing us with any helpful
information that you and your local criminal justice authority might provide our County's Public
Protection Committee in our effort to minimize any adverse impact on local communities when
these men and women are returned to the community.
A suggestion was made thk our committee form a delegation or send representatives to visit
your county for direct observation of the programs, however, we have.not been successful in that
effort, and the Board of Supervisors wants to bring this discussion to closure. Could you and
your partners in Criminal Justice provide me with a formal written reply to this request that I
might share with our Public Protection Committee and other member of the Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa Alcohol and Other Drug Services•Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services•Contra Costa Environmental Health•Contra Costa Health Plan
Contra Costa Hazardous Materials•Contra Costa Mental Health•Contra Costa Public
ublic Health•Contra Costa Regional Medical Center•Contra Costa Health Centers
Mr. Robert Garner, Director
County of Santa Clara
Department of Alcohol and Drug Services
July 7, 2008
Page 2
by July 14, 2008. That date is just prior to our next meeting and I would like each member of.the
Committee, and. the Office of the Sheriff to have an opportunity to review your information
before the meeting:
I appreciate your indulgence and apologize for the quick responses requested.
Sincerely,
Haven Fea
Director
Contra Costa Alcohol and Other Drug Services.•Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services•Contra Costa Environmental Health•Contra Costa Health Plan
Contra Costa Hazardous Materials.Contra Costa Mental Health.Contra Costa Public Health•Contra Costa Regional Medical Center.Contra Costa Health Centers
= e
Administration
SANTA CLARA 976 tenzen,Avenue
VALLEY San lose, 95126
Dedicated to the Health Tel.Californiaalifo is 95680
of the Whole Community Fax.(408)947-8702
HEALTH&HOSPITAL SYSTEM
DEPARTMENT OF
ALCOHOL & DRUG SERVICES
July 14, 2008
Mr. Haven Fearn, Director
Contra Costa County
Alcohol and Other Drug Services
597 Center Avenue, Suite 320
Martinez, California 94553
Dear Mr. Fearn:
I am pleased to respond to your request for information about our local experience with the in-Custody Drug
Treatment Program (ICDTP), supported by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
In Santa Clara County this involves our Department of Correction (DOC), which is separate from.the Sheriffs
Department.
Our DOC does house the ICDTP.program, providing jail housing for these state inmates. The program is taught
by•adult education out of San Mateo County. DOC provides only the housing and is not involved in the
curriculum or training for the Programa
After reading your letter, my first observation is that there may be confusion regarding the content of the ICDTP
program. While it is called treatment, it is really educational in nature'. And in fact, the state's in-custody
treatment has been viewed as being a major failure. But I do believe,the kind of educational program offered is
helpful, especially if there is a planned transition to the community,with adequate support services available
upon re-entry. And it is the re-entry that is usually the problem.
I do not believe that CRDC provides any support for the substance abuse treatment or other support services in
the community that are really,the key to successful reintegration. While the AA, NA and other similar aftercare
groups mentioned in the letter are, in fact, free and available in every;community, they do not constitute
substance abuse treatment in any way, but are an adjunct and support to treatment And so, these inmates are
usually dumped onto an already overburdened and.inadequately funded drug and alcohol treatment system in
the community.
Your letter also refers to.the plan to follow the jail-based phase with 30 days of follow-up residential treatment,
with a possibility for extended stay. First, the determination of the level of treatment is and must be a clinical
determination, made by certified substance abuse counselors using valid assessment tools. Second, unless
your County has excess treatment capacity, these new clients will either end upon a waiting list or bump other
clients from treatment What I believe is lacking is adequate state funding to expand the treatment system to
accommodate these new clients. And without it, relapse and recidivism are likely.
In summary, while I strongly support in-custody services to help inmates with their myriad problems and prepare
them for re-entry,to invest in the in-custody services without investing in the community services falls short of
what is required for success.
Sincere ,
/Robert Garner
Director
The Department of Alcohol&Drug Services is a division of the Santa Clara Valley Health&Hospital System.Owned and operated by the County of Santa Clara.
CCCOE Educational Opportunities I CDC Page 1 of
Attachment 1 Contra Costa County Office of Education
Rr da:I7I5 Student Programs &Services
&Services
Adult Correctional Education
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
ProgramsStudent
Services Director, Lynn Mackey
925.942.5308
Special Ed.
Imackey@a cccoe.k1.2.ca.us
Educational Opps.
--Quick Links--
ROP
Com uterized Literac Learnin C ntersYouth Dev.Svcs. ( Substance Abuse Treatment$ Recovery
_y _�_ e
In Custo_y Drug Treatment Program I Parolee Substance Abuse Program
CDCR Contacts
Home Search'
classes Jobs The Division of Adult Parole Operations(DAPO)of the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation has collaborated with the Contra Costa County Office of
Education to develop educational programs designed to reduce the number of parolees
returning to prison. Classes are conducted at parole offices and jail facilities throughout
the state.
Computerized Literacy Learning Centers
A series of Computerized Literacy Learning Centers has been implemented
in Parole Offices statewide offering adult basic education in reading,writing,
math,G.E.D.,and resume writing. By offering curriculum and instruction via
computers,participants learn at their own pace and are offered lessons
tailored to meet their individual learning needs.
A CDCR report has shown a correlation between functional literacy and
employment.Today's employers require basic literacy skills that many
parolees do not have. More than half read below the sixth grade level and
about 70%of them are unemployed. Lack of literacy and employability skills
are primary barriers to parole success.Without gainful employment,today's
parolees are at a high risk of returning to prison.
The Parolee Education Program Computerized Literacy Learning Centers
offer parolees reading,writing and math lessons via computer-assisted
learning format.An evaluation of the program after two years of operation
showed that parolees increased reading and math skills by an average of
two grade levels.
CDCR programs are located in parole offices throughout the state.
Substance Abuse Treatment and Recovery
The STAR (Substance Abuse Treatment and Recovery)program is a
curriculum-based educational program designed to motivate parolee
substance abusers to participate in post-release recovery activities. New
skills are presented which help individuals understand the relapse process
and prepare for smooth,drug free community transition.
httn-/hanuw rrrnP Irl? ra iic/ctc��rc�attPrl/rein l,t,,,l .rnni,.
CCCOE Educational Opportunities CDC Page 2 of-4
The core components of the STAR Curriculum address the Process of
Addiction,the Process of Recovery,Anger Management, and Community
Transition as well as other essential elements that provide participants with
information designed to facilitate substance abuse recovery. The
curriculum addresses denial and stimulates individual growth through active
participation.
The five-step process model of instruction is used to help parolees develop
a new understanding of their substance abuse problem.
The parolee is motivated to make lifestyle changes.This educational path
facilitates disclosure and provides motivation. It also is designed to help
parolees understand the thoughts,feelings:and events that trigger relapse.
Overall,the program helps them develop insight into core issues involved in
changing values and behaviors.
In Custody Drug Treatment Program
Parolees who are failing in the community or in the parole office STAR
class can .begin their recovery,while still on parole,in an In Custody Drug
Treatment Program(ICDTP).
ICDTP classes are held in county jail facilities while parolees serve 60 days.
After the completion of the in-custody phase of the program, participants
are required to complete 30 days of residential aftercare in the community.
In addition,60 days of voluntary aftercare is provided upon release from
ICDTP.
This program gives parolees an understanding of substance abuse and
recovery using a curriculum that includes The Cycle of Addiction,The .
Process of Recovery, Stress and Anger Management, Relationships,
Relapse Prevention,and Successful Transition Planning.
Parolee Substance Abuse Program
The Parolee Substance Abuse Program(PSAP)is a supervised,intensive 90-day
substance abuse education program for parolees located at the Folsom Transitional
Treatment Facility. The program helps parolees within a controlled prison environment to
understand substance abuse and recovery using curriculum that includes The Cycle of
Addiction,The Process of Recovery,Stress and Anger Management, Healthy
Relationships, and Relapse Prevention.
Teachers work on-on-one with parolees to develop a personalized Community Transition
Plan. Specific risk areas are addressed throughout the plan that also includes educational
and employment strategies and other vital resources.
A 90-day voluntary aftercare program upon release from PSAP is provided by Substance
Abuse Services Coordinating Agencies.
CDCR Contacts:
Director IlLynn Mackey IF925,942,5308
Division Project Specialist11925.942.5302
FAX 11925.942.5310
Principal Shannon Swain 925.942.5320
Northern California
Project Coordinator ]Marc Armstr..ong 925.942.5328
Northern California
Project Coordinator Jim Sanford 925.942.5301
Northern California
httn•1/�ananxr rrrna 1r17 ro iiclo4n�rnn/nlro.i/..,a., t,+....,1 "^^"'^""
CCCOE Educational Opportunities CDC Page 3 of.3
IFAX I+ 11925.942.5310
Project CoordinatorSam Williams. 916.351.5891
Northern California (FTTF)
FAX 916.608.9719
Technology Specialist Amy Nichols 925.296.1502
Northern California
FAX 11925.296.1531
PrincipalPamela Branch.. 559.255.9488
:7�]Central California 11
Project Coordinator
FR-0-
bertWalker 11559.255.6651
Central California
Project Coordinator David Jauregui 661.391.2098
Central California
Technology Specialist 77]�n"Baler 559.255.9467
Central California
Principal _La ara.Strachan 951.845.4359
:::]Southern California
Project Coordinator Bir Bradley J909.806.3516 ext.
Southern California 2016
Project Coordinator Carolyn.LePage 11619.441.2302 ext.
Southern California 1320
Project Coordinator D.ia.ne Mierzwik 951.845.4097
7
Southern California
Technology Specialist rhriis-Wilso.n. 925.457.8520
Southern California
Administrative Assistant II Southern Annette Apodaca 925.942.5325
Region
Administrative Assistant II Central Region IlEd McCarty 925.942.5309
Administrative Assistant II NorthernJean Walker 925.942.5304
Region
FAX 11 11925.296.1559 .
Administrative Assistant II Northern Janette Kofler 916.351.5928
Region(FTTF)
FAX 1916.608.9719
Data Technician VinCeltt_Pn.g 925.296.1505
Data Technician !Cham 925.296.1503
Phaxaypraseuth 11 1
Data Technician Christie.Underwood 925.296.1504
FAX 925.296.1531
Warehouse Worker Richard Gamba 925.296.1506
FAX 11 11925.942.5310
77 Santa Barbara Road
Pleasant Rdl,CaSfcmia 94523
(925)9423388
lhttn•//unv-,v r.rrnP lrl7 ra lic/ctc�rrcl�l4A.iJn.a. 7,4„,1
Attachment 2
• Corrections Reform
County Policy Principles and Guidelines
.Preamble
In light of the state's recent focus on corrections reform — primarily on recidivism
and overcrowding in state detention facilities, counties feel it'is essential to
articulate their values and objectives as vital participants in the overall corrections
continuum. Further, counties understand that they must be active participants in
any successful effort to improve the corrections system in our state. Given that
local and state corrections systems are interconnected, true reform must consider
the advantage — if..not necessity — of investing in local programs and services to
help the state reduce the rate of growth in the prison population. Front-end
investment in local programs and initiatives will enrich the changes currently being
contemplated to the state system and, more importantly, will yield greater
economic and social dividends that benefit communities across the state.
Recognizing that preserving public safety — a matter of paramount importance in
communities statewide — will be enhanced by ensuring that appropriate attention
and commitment are focused on rehabilitation for adult and juvenile offenders,
counties offer the following Corrections Reforms Principles and Guidelines that, we
believe, will help advance discussions between the state and counties.
Fundamental Principles
■ An optimum corrections strategy must feature a strong and committed
partnership between the state and local governments.
■ State and local authorities must focus on making productive use of offenders'
time while in custody or under state or local supervision. A shared
commitment to rehabilitation can help address the inextricably linked
challenges of.recidivism and facility overcrowding. The most effective
method of rehabilitation is one that maintains ties to an offender's
community.
■ Programs and services must be.adequately funded to enable counties to
accomplish their functions in the corrections.system and to ensure successful
outcomes for.. offenders. To the extent that new programs or services are
contemplated, support must be in the form of a dedicated, new and
sustained. funding source rather than a redirection of existing resources.
■ System and process changes must recognize that the 58 California counties
have unique characteristics, differing capacities, and diverse environments.
Programs should be designed to.promote innovation at the local level and to
permit maximum flexibility, so that services can best target individual
community needs and capacities.
• Counties and the state can best achieve their shared objectives by.focusing
on results both in the form of improved offender outcomes and community
safety.
Adopted November 30,2006..
Corrections Reform
County Policy Principles and Guidelines • Page 2
Reform Policy Guidelines
The following reform policy guidelines represent specific proposals that serve to
promote the principles outlined above.
• Keys to Slowing the Prison Population Growth: Investment in local
programs and facilities. The state's investment in local programs and
facilities returns an overall benefit to the state corrections system and
community safety. State support of local programs and facilities will aid
materially in addressing the "revolving door" problem in state and local
detention facilities.
The state should invest in improving,expanding and renovating local
detention facilities to address overcrowding, early releases, and
improved delivery of inmate health care. Incentives should be
included to encourage in-custody treatment programs and other
services.
13 The state.should invest in adult probation services — using as a
potential model the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (33CPA) — to
build a continuum of intervention, prevention, and supervision services
for adult offenders.
• The state should continue to fully support the successful JJCPA
initiative, which provides a range'of juvenile crime prevention and
intervention programs and which represents a critical component of
an overall crime reduction and public safety improvement strategy.
Diverting juveniles from a life of offending will help to reduce pressure
on the adult system.
• The state should invest in mentally ill in-custody treatment and
jail diversion programs, where treatment and services can help
promote long-term stability in mentally ill offenders or those with co-
occurring disorders, decrease recidivism, and divert appropriate
offenders out of the criminal justice system.
The state should continue to invest in alcohol and drug treatment
and diversion programs, including but not limited to outpatient
treatment facilities, given that the vast majority of inmates in state
and local systems struggle with addiction, which is a primary factor in
.their criminality.
• Inmate reentry programs. Reentry programs represent a promising
means for addressing recidivism by providing a continuum of care that
facilitates .early risk assessment, prevention, and transition of inmates back
into the community through appropriate treatment, life skills training, job
placement, and other services and supports. The state should consider
California State Association of Counties
1100 K Street,Suite 101•Sacramento,CA•95814
(916)327-7500•FAX:(916) 441-5507
Adopted November 30,2006 www.csac.counties.org
Corrections Reform
County Policy Principles and Guidelines - Page 3
further investment in multiagency programs' authorized under SB 6181, which
are built on proven, evidence-based strategies including comprehensive pre-
sentence assessments, in-custody treatment, targeted case management,
and the development of an individualized life plan. These programs promote
a permanent shift in the way nonviolent felony offenders are managed,
treated and released into their respective communities. Examples of
program elements that have been demonstrated to improve offenders'
chances for a successful reintegration into their communities upon release
from custody include, but are not limited to, the following:
13 Early risks and needs assessment that incorporates assessments of the
need for treatment of alcohol and other drug abuse, and the degree of
need for literacy, vocational and mental health services;
13 In-custody treatment that is appropriate to each individual's needs —
no one-size-fits-all programming;
After care and relapse prevention services to maintain a "clean and
sober" lifestyle;
13 Strong linkages to treatment, vocational training, and support services
in the community;
13 Prearranged housing and employment (or vocational training) for
offenders before release into their communities of residence;
Preparation of the community and offenders' families to receive and
supporteach offender's new law-respecting and productive lifestyle
before release through counseling and public education that recognize
and address the inter-generational impact and cycles of criminal
justice system involvement.
13 Long-term mentorship and support from faith-based and other
community and cultural support organizations that will last a lifetime,
not just the duration of the parole period; and
13 Community-based treatment options and sanctions.
Counties believe that such ,reentry programs should include incentives for
inmate participation.
■ Siting of new facilities. Counties acknowledge that placement of
correctional facilities is controversial. However, the state must be sensitive
to community response to changing the use of, expanding, or siting new
correctional facilities (prisons, community correctional facilities, or reentry
facilities). Counties and other affected municipalities must be involved as
active participants in planning and decision-making processes regarding site
selection. Providing for security and appropriate mitigations to the local
community are essential.
1 Chapter 603, Statutes of 2005.
California State Association of Counties
• 1100 K Street,Suite 101•Sacramento,CA•95814
(916)327-7500•FAX:(916) 441.5507
Adopted November 30,2006 www.csac-counties.org
Corrections Reform
County Policy Principles and Guidelines • Page 4
Impact on local treatment capacity. Counties and the state must be aware of
the impact on local communities' existing treatment capacity (e.g., mental health,
drug treatment, vocational services, sex offender treatment) if the correction
reforms contemplate a major new demand on services as part of development of
community correctional facilities, reentry programs, or other locally based
programs. Specialized treatment services that are not widely available are likely
the first to be overtaxed. To prevent adverse impacts upon existing alcohol and
drug and mental health treatment programs for primarily non-criminal justice
system participants, treatment capacity shall be increased to accommodate criminal
justice participants. In addition, treatment capacity shall be separately developed
and funded.
Emerging and best practices. Counties support the development and
implementation of a mechanism for collecting and sharing of best practices that can
help advance correction reform efforts.
California State Association of Counties
1100 K Street,Suite 101•Sacramento,CA-95814
(916)327-7500•FAX:(916) 441-5507
Adopted November 30,2006 www.csac.counties.org
Attachment 3
TABLE 45A
TOTAL FELONS PAROLED AND REPAROLED FROM AN INSTITUTION
BY REGION AND COUNTY OF PAROLE
CALENDAR YEAR 2006
-------------------------------=-----------------------------------------------------
I I I TYPE OF PAROLE t
II I---------------------------------------I
I I TOTAL I FIRST PAROLE I REPAROLE I
I-------------------+-------------------+-------------------I
I NUMBER ]PERCENT I NUMBER (,PERCENT I NUMBER IPERCENT I
----------------------+-------------------+-------------------
ITOTAL 1 131,3561 100.01 67,3851 100.01 63,971 1 100.01
----------------------+--------- +--------+------------------- I
IREGION OF PAROLE I I I I I I I
I-----------------------I I I I I I
IREGION I/ISPU 1 33,6791 25.61 14,6141 21.71 19,0651 29.81
----------------------+----------+--------+------------------- I
IREGION II 1 26,5121 20.21 10,8461 16.11 15,6661 24.51
1-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
(REGION III 1 32,6561 24.91 21,6891 32.21 10,9671 17.11
1=----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+---7- +--------
(REGION IV 1 38,5091 29.31 20,2361 30.01 18,2731 28.61
I---------=-------------------------------------------------------------------------1
ICOUNTY OF PAROLE I 1 I I I I I
I-----------------------I I I I I. I I
IALAMEDA 1 6,2701 4.81 2,1991 4.24 3,4111 5.41
----=-----------------+----------+--------+.----------+--------+------
(ALPINE 1 41 0.01 11 0.01 31 0.01
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
IAMADOR '1 501 0.01 351 0.11 151 0.01
I-----------------------+------------------------------------------------------------
I BUTTE
---------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------IBUTTE 1 110861 0.81 4921 6..71 5941 0.91
I----------------=------+-------.---+--------+---=------+--------+----------+--------I
ICALAVERAS 1 721 0.11 481 0.11 241 0.01
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
COLUSA
0.01
I------ I 491 --- 261 --- 231 ---I
ICONTRA COSTA 1 1,9871 1.51 6141 0.911,3731 2.11
-----------+----------+--------+----------+--------------- +--------I
DEL
NORTE
0.
0.11
I--- ----- I 991 0,1( 411 -- --4 ---I
IEL DORADO ! 2991 0.21 1281 D.21 1711 0.31
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
IFRESNO 1 5,2421 4,01 1,9231 2.91 3,3191 5.21
1-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
IGLENN 1 1151 0.11 511 0.11 641 0.11
I---------------=-------+----------+--------+----=-----+--------+----------+--------I
1HUMBOLDT 1 7831 0.61 2781 0.41 5051 0.81
I-------------------------------=--+--------+-------'--+--------+----------+--------I
(IMPERIAL 1 . 4211 0.31 1551 0.21 2661 0.41
i-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+---- +----------+--------I
,(INTERSTATE PAROLE UNIT I I I I I I I
I (ISPU) 1 1941 0.11 1881 0.31 61 0.01
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------1
IINYO 1 341 0.01 291 0.01 51 0.01
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+------=-+----------+--------I
1KERN . ' 1 4,4831 3.41 2,2571 . 3.31 2,2261 3.51
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----= +--------I
IKINGS 1 9461 0.71 3701 0.51 5761 0.91
I-----------------------+----------+--=-----+----------+--------+----------+--------I
(LAKE 1 3321 . 0.31 1331 0.21 199) 0.31
1-----------------------+----------+--------+-------.---+--------+----------+--------I
ILASSEN 1 1171 0.11 461 0.11 711 0.11
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
ILOS ANGELES 1 32,7611 24.91 21,7331 32.31 11,0281 17.21
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+-------- +--------I
MDERA I 7701 0.61 3031 0.41 4611 0.11
I-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
IMARIN 1 631 0.01 301 0.01 331 0,11
I------------=----------+--------=-+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
IMARIPOSA 1 381 0.01 211 0.0( 171 0.01
I--------------------=--+---------=---------------------+--------- ----------+--------I
IMENDOCINO 1 3141 0.31 1391 0.21 2351 0.41
1-----------------------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------I
IMERCED 1 110191 0.61 4321 0.61 5871 0.91
--------------------------------------------------------------------.-----------------
CALIFORNIA PRISONERS AND PAROLEES 63
Attachment 4
M1 California,Department of!
Corrections Parolees
By County
COUNTY =ACTIVE PAROLEES 'CURRENTLY
on 10116107 RELEASED IN 2006 REVOKED on
10116/07
1 Alameda 3938 2799 777
2 'Alpine 2 1 1
3 Amador 92 35 5
4 Bulla 1198 492 148
5 Calaveras 102 48 23
6 Coluse 57 49 6
7 Contra Costa 1530 614 284
6 Del Norte 139 41 14
9 EI Dorado 341 128 47
10 Fresno 5253 1923 1206
11 Glenn 135 51 26
_12 Humboldt 584 278 83
13 Imperial 356 155 68
14 Inyo 41 29 5
15 Kern 4840 2257 781 .
16 Kings 942 370131
17 Lake 350 133 43
18 Lesson 105 46 13
19 Los Angeles 40029 21733 2492
20 Madera 631 303 129
21 Marin 167 30 17
22 Mariposa 50 21 3
23 Mendodno 268 139 37
24 Merced 960 432 tet
25 Modoc 28 14 11
26 Mono 21 9 3
27 Monterey 1177 525 162
28 Napa 227 100 15
29 Nevada 141 42 11
30 Orange 7479 6037 914
31 Placer _ 646 290 94
32 Plumes 50 32 9
33 Riverside 8425 4370 1189
34 Sacramento 4568 3337 719
35 San Benito 111 45 18
36 Sen Semardi- 10650 5521 1665
37 San Diego 8566 4123 1266
38 San Francisco 1601 583 302
39 San Joaquin 2545 1271 ( 577
40 San Luis Obispo 1061 479 79
41 San Mateo 1143 636 ( 118
42 Santa Barbara 1209 542 189
43 Santa Clara 4642 1846 430
44 Santa Cruz 459 199 82
45 Shasta 1297 545 171
46 Sierra 5 4 0
47 Siskiyou 144 5B 20
48 Solano 1602 692 219
49 Sonoma 873 365 111
50 Stanislaus 1694 837 262
51 Sutter 427 236 74
52 Tehama 364 214 69
53 Trinity 50 22 6
54 Tulare 1930 747 293
55 Tuolumne 134 51 18
56 Ventura 1565 797 309
57 Yolo 652 331 109
58 Iyubs 414 213 97
No County Identified(out of stale,possible 6732 25767 892
deportation)
TOP. 734742.' ;' .'929.8.2.::`<:.':.:.:: 17043'
l
LEGEND )
=From a[Parole-Active Parolees are parolees on parole on 10116107.
'From OBIS•Released In 2006:"First Parole"the number of people released to the specific
county,from an adult institution in 2006.This number includes first termers,new termers
and Parole Violators With a New Term(PVWNT).
Division of Reentry and Recidivism Reduction 212912008
Attachment 5
Data Analysis Unit Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Estimates and Statistical Analysis Section State of California
Offender Information Services Branch January 2008
TABLE 213
TOTAL MALE.FELONS PAROLED AND REPAROLED FROM
AN ADULT INSTITUTION BY COUNTY OF PAROLE
CALENDAR YEAR 2007
TYPE OF PAROLE
TOTAL FIRST PAROLE REPAROLE
COUNTY OF PAROLE I �- - ---- --�----- - - -
NUMBER ' PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT
TOTAL 123,645 100.0 60,147 100.01 1 63,498 1 100.0
ALAMEDA --- --- 6,486: 5.2 _2,609. 4.3 --3_877 -6.1
ALPINE l 1 0.07
! 0.0� 41 0.0
AMADOR 461 0.0 i 3011 0.01 16' 0.0
BUTTE 1,0331 0.8 429 0.7 6041 1.0
CALAVERAS 41 0.0 27 0.0 14 0.0
-COLUSA _ --- --33, 0.01 16 - 0.0: - 17_l 0.0
CONTRA COSTA -1,8621 1.51 532 0.91 11330 2.1
DEL NORTE 100i 0.11 50i 0.1 50 0.1
EL DORADO 326 0.3 115 0.21 211 0.3
FRESNO 5,292 4.3: 1,948 3.21 3,344: 5.3
GLENN 134 0.1 541 0.1 801 0.1
HUMBOLDT 758 0.6` 261 0.4 497' 0.8
IMPERIAL 377 0.31 139! 0.2. 238! 0.4
INTERSTATE PAROLE UNIT(ISPU) 175 0.1 1691 0.3! 6 0.0
INYO 39' 0.0 32 0.1 7 0.0
KERN 4,260 3.4; 1,944 3.2 . 2,316 3.6
KINGS 897 . 0.7� 365 0.6. 532 0.8
LAKE I 342 0.3; 159 0.3 183 0.3
LASSEN 101 0.1 54 0.1 ! 47 0.1
LOS ANGELES 1 28,553; 23.1 19,461 32.4; 9,092. 14.3
MADERA ; 703I 0.6 249 0.41 454 0.7
MAR-IN 68 0.1 28 0.0- 40' 0.1
(Continued)
Reference Number: MISC-5
Attachment 6
Data Analysis Unit Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Estimates and Statistical Analysis Section State of California
Offender Information Services Branch January 2008
TABLE IB
TOTAL FELONS PAROLED AND REPAROLED FROM
AN ADULT INSTITUTION BY COUNTY OF PAROLE
CALENDAR YEAR 2607
1 TYPE OF PAROLE
TOTAL FIRST PAROLE REPAROLE
COUNTY OF PAROLE ! NUMBER�-PERCENT NUMBER j PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT
TOTAL j l 37,478! 100.0 68,l 04 100.01 69,374 100.0
ALAMEDA 6,831 5.0 2,763 4.11 4,068 5.9
ALPINE ]1 0.0! 71 0.0; 4 0.0
AMADOR 501 01.01 311 0.0 19. 0.0
I
BUTTE 1,138', 0.81 .494 0.7 644' 0.9
--- --- - -�-- --�. -- - --i
CALAVERAS ' 49i 0.01 29 0.01 20' 0.0
COLUSA 39 0.01 21 0.0 18 0.0
CONTRA COSTA 1,989 1.41 577 0.81 1,412 2.0
DEL NORTE 107 0.11 55 0.1 52 0.1
ELDORADO 354 0.3 128 0.2 226 0.3
FRESNO 5,992 4.4 2,2391 3.3 3,753 5.4
GLENN j 145 0.11 610-IL 84 0.1
- ---- ;.
HUMBOLDT 804 0.61 2851 0.41 519 0.7
IMPERIAL 4030.3 - 152 0.2 2511 0.4
INTERSTATE PAROLE UNIT(I SPU) , 1831 O.l 176' 0.3: 7 0.0
INYO 43 0.0. 35: 0.1 8 0.0
KERN 4,7721 3.5 2,229 3.3 2,5431 3.7
KINGS 1,022 0.7 429 0.6 593 ' 0.9
LAKE 386 0.31 190 0.3; 196' 0.3
LASSEN 104 0.1 55 0.1 49 0.1
LOS ANGELES 31,970 23.3 22,020 32.3 9,950! 14.3
MADERA 790: 0.6' 282 0.4! 508 0.7
MAR1N 71 0.1 , .29' 0.0'1 42 0.1
(Continued)
Reference Number: MISC-5
Parolee arrested in sexual assault - ContraCostaTimes.com Page 1 of 3
Attachment 7
Set •
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
Adult Leamersfor Over
Sign ir.
Home News My Town Sports Business Entertainment Living Columns Opinion Help J(
Obituaries I Bay&State I Nation&World I Crime&Courts I Education I- Health I Politics I Science I Growth I Environment
Most Viewed Most Emailed ��
del.icio.us =-Digg �Reddit rj YahooMyWeb LGiGoogle Q Facebook
(From the last 12 hours) Z
1. Cows stampede on I- d RePrint Print i> 'Email
680 freeway near
Concord
2. Two arrested, three . Parolee arrested in sexual assault
police cars damaged
after short Concord By Karl Fischer
pursuit West County Times
3. Customers still Article Launched: 05/15/2008 12:05:47 PM PDT
without power in
Walnut Creek after EI Cerrito police arrested a parolee they say sexually assaulted a woman on
outage the Ohlone Greenway on Monday night and possibly tried to attack others earlier in IN
4. Man trapped for
nearly three days in Oakland resident Troyshawn Robinson,20, approached a man and'woman walking or
wrecked car off 1-680 Avenue and brandished a knife, police Cpl. Sue Garman said.
in North...
.5. Russell to prove he's He mugged them,then held the man at bay with the knife while he sexually assaulted
game-ready said.
6. Woman's hair traps
her in overturned car "He did cut her a little with the knife,"Garman said."But the knife injury was not seriou
after Antioch accident
The Times does not identify victims of sexual assault without their consent.
The man left about 8:15 p.m.and witnesses called police. Patrol officers searched stre
Norte BART station and found Robinson,Garman said;witnesses identified Robinson
Top Classifieds found property belonging to the victims on him,according to police.
JOBS AUTOS RENTALS REAL
ESTATE They also found property belonging to a woman who was mugged in a similar crime e,
Garman said,and Oakland police also are now investigating Robinson.
Bank Foreclosures/
freelocaleastbayhomeinfo.com El Cerrito police say someone similarly approached another woman near the BART sti
Click for Details managed to flee.
All Listings
Robinson,who was on parole for robbery and sexual assault convictions,was booked
EI Cerrito police reported no other similar crimes of late on the Ohlone Greenway,
a trail known for mu(
--- Del Norte BART.
Advertisement
Reach Karl Fischi
titin //xxnxnxr rnntrornof,f;--o rrim/n,-.rv+---A .., a / n-nano A,'
arrested, three police cars damaged after short Concord pursuit - ContraCostaTimes.... Page 1 of 1
Attachment 8
CONTRACOSTATIMES
ContfaCostaTimos.com
Two arrested, threeolice No one was hurt and the car was not seriously
p damaged.
cars damaged after short The two men were identified as Ernesto Chalco, 25,
Concord pursuit of Pacheco;and Leonard Covarrubias,37,of
Antioch. Both were arrested on suspicion of vehicle
theft,possession of stolen property,evading police
By Roman Gokhman and parole violations.
Contra Costa Times
As two other officers were responding to Windsor
Article Launched:05/15/2008 10:23:19 PM PDT Place, their cars collided in the intersection of Fifth
CONCORD—Police arrested two men early Street and Mount Diablo.Street,Wiesendanger said.
Thursday after short pursuit that ended when the The officers were not hurt but the cars were
suspect's car—which turned out to be stolen— moderately damaged.
failed to break through a cyclone fence.
Reach Roman Gokhman at 925-945-4780, or
Then,two officers responding to the conclusion of at rgokhman@bayareanewsgroup.com .
the pursuit crashed into each other,damaging their
patrol cars but escaping any injuries, police said.
The pursuit began at 3:51 a.m.when an officer
spotted a white 1997 Honda Accord speeding near
Clayton Road and Bailey Road, Concord police Lt.
Brian Wiesendanger said.
"Then (the officer)ran the plate and it came back as
stolen out of Concord,"he said.
The car,with two men inside, led police on a two-
minute,three-mile pursuit at speeds of up to 80
mph.The driver turned onto Fifth Street and then
onto Windsor Place,which is a dead end,
Wiesendanger said.
The driver attempted to drive through the cyclone
fence at the dead end of Windsor and into Loma
Vista Adult Education Center.
The car failed to break through the fence.
"It rolled back and into a patrol car,"he said.
Advertisement
ContiKostaTimest800) 598-4637
-� COSfATIMEsco
't
CONT` __...... _
Subscribe today!
�pr �-*
r M.iV .5:1`: [N>wsn.t tsYN w.
WWW.Contracostatimes.com/Subscriberservices
c �P„� 1 ••'�•„� •°°
Print Powered 13y :�.bj : ,. : :... .C:yr.....^I-
(4/29/?.008) Mike Newman_=drug-chg.pdf Page 1
Attachment 9
Current inmates (see data date to right) 04/25/2008
at least one arrest charge is drug related (charge list on last page)
FAC BOOKINGS
1 426
2 729
3 76
4 350
(BOCK FAC} in 1 to 4 and {BOCK RES STATU S) like ["C4',"I N']and
(ala OCDE_SECT 104 23152(6) VC
1 N 11370.1 F6 11550(C) 23152/23175 VC
11350 16 11370.1(A) F6 11550(C) F6 23153(A) VC
11350 F6 11370.2(A)F6 11550(E) 23153(A) VC
11350(A) F6 11370.21-6 23140(A) 23153(A)/23560 VC
11350(6) F6 11370.9 (A) 'F6 23152(A) / 23550 VC 23153(6) VC
11375(B F6 23152(A) / 23550.5 VC 23153(B) VC
11351 F6 11375(B)(1) F6 23152(A) / 23550.5\/C 23222(A) VC
11351.5 F6 11377 F6 23152(A) VC 23222(A) VC
11352(A) F6 11377(A) F6 23152(A) VC 23222(B) VC
11352(A) F6 11377(A) F6 23152(A) VU 23550 23223(A)VC
11353 F6 11377(A)F6 23152(A)/ 23550 VC 23550 VC
11355 F6 11378 F6 23152(A)/23175 VC 23550(A)
11357 F6 11379 FS 23152(A)/23550 Ca/C 23550(A)
11357(A) F6 11379(A) F6 23152(A)/23550 VC 23550(A) CVC
11357(A) F6 11379.6(A) F6 23152(A)/23550 VC 23550.5(A) CVC
11357(8) FS 11383(C)(1) F6 23152(A)/23550. 5 VC 4140 BP
11357(C) F6 11391 F6 23152(A)/23550. 5VC 4140BP
11358 F6. 11532 F6 23152(A)23550 VC 4573 PC
11359 F6 11532FB 23152(A)VC 4573.5 PC
11360(A) F6 11550•. 23152(B) / 23550 VC 4573.6 PC
11360(8) F6 11550 (B) 23152(B) / 23550.5 VC 66-101 CNC
11361(A) FG 11550: F6 23152(B) VC CVU3152(A)
11361(B) FS 11550(A) 23152(8)/ 23550 VC CVC23152(B)
11364 F6 11550(A) 23152(B)/23550 VC CVC'Q0508(A)
11364.7(A) F6 11550(B) 23152(B)/23550 VC FLS11350
11364F6 11550(B) 23152(B)/23550. 5 VC FtSS11378
Page 1 of 1
(3/3/2008) Mike Newman - S&B 0708 Dpty.Sgt.Lt.Cpt for CptNewman.xls Page 1
Attachment 10
2007108.
DEPUTY
Descri tions ESTIMATED SALARY & BENEFITS
TOP STEP-At End of FY07/08
Base Pay $6,792.00
Education Incentive $339.60
Safety Longevity $339.60
_ife Insurance $2.10
=.I.C.A. (Medicare) $93.39
Retirement $4,865.99
Retiree Health Care $459.00
Worker Compensation $560.49
Jnemployment Insurance $14.94
health Insurance $1,223.00
Salary&Benefit/Monthly $14,690.11
Salary&Benefit/Yearly $176,281.37
Annual Uniform Allowance $876.00
--loliday Pay(13) $6,792.01
MAXIMUM TOTAL SALARY&
BENEFIT COSTS $183;949..38
OVERTIME COSTS
Overtime Hourly Rate $58.78
'::ICA on Overtime Hourly Rate $0.73
Jnemployment on OT Rate $0.12
Workers Comp on OT Rate $4.41
Total Overtime Hourly Costs $64.04
Preapared by Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff-Fiscal Unit-9/25/07