The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 10102006 - C.77 SFaL Contra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ;a£_ _•a . FROM: Lionel D. Chatman, County Probation Officer :. •,.: Costa J I DATE: October 10, 2006 Z �� SUBJECT: Sixth Annual Report on the Juvenile Justice Crime Count coc��' Prevention Act Probation Department Programs SPECIFIC R_QU_S-tS).OR RECO::"I_\DATION(S)&B rIKGROIND AND-USTIF;CATION RECOMMENDATION: Accept the sixth annual report on the County Probation Department programs funded through the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA). I BACKGROUND: I The statutes governing the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act funds requires in Section 30061(4)(E)(i) of the Government Code that each county shall annually report to the County Board of Supervisors and the Corrections Standards Authority on outcome measures and expenditures for programs approved in the comprehensive multi- agency juvenile justice plans. The penalty for failure to report the required data is forfeiture of subsequent allocations from the fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Contra Costa County Probation Department is submitting its Annual JJCPA report for the period of July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006. Contra Costa County's allocation for FY 05-06 was S2,770,491. The funds I allocated by the State have allowed Contra Costa County to continue proven programs providing services to the youth of Contra Costa County. During the past FY the following programs were funded through the JJCPA: Community Probation, School-Based Deputy Probation Officers - Middle and High Schools. and the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility Aftercare Program. The evaluators, Mark Morris and Associates (M.M.A.), provided this information. I The Community Probation Unit consists of eight Deputy Probation Officers stationed at various police i departments throughout the county. Having DPO's at the police departments allows Probation to foster positive working relationships with our community partners, while at the same time holding minors accountable. This program served 350 minors throughout FY 05.;06. During the intervention period only 5% of the minors were placed outside their homes and only 19% were detained in Juvenile Hall. Furthermore. the vast majority was not arrested for committing new law violations. The High School Unit consists of eleven DPO's stationed at eleven comprehensive high schools throughout the county. This program served 475 minors of whom only 7% were arrested for new law violations and 3% had sustained petitions for these violations. Furthermore, only 3% of the minors were placed outside of their homes and 3% were detained in Juvenile Hall during the intervention period. I The Middle School Unit has four DPOs. who split their time among eight middle schools in the County. These four deputies served 188 middle school students during FY 05:06. Like the High School Unit. very few middle schools students in the program were arrested for new law violations, and of those who were arrested for new law violations, only 3% received a sustained petition. Lastly, 1% of the youth were placed outside of their homes and 1% were detained in Juvenile Hall. CONTINJED ON A AC 1.'.18\T: _X -YES -SIGNAT - -----------`.... -111 ,,,!!!=- _'_ -- :/fZCOt.1I 1E\DA7ON C=COJ\T`AD:US-RATOR RECO-AME\DATION OF BOARD COMMI-EE ✓;PPROV E O-F:ER i S:GNATURE(S): ACTIO\OF BO&ON It) I t t3 APPRO` _AS RECO--.1r.1ENDED OT=ER VOTE OF SJPER`v'ISCRS 1 HEREBY CERTI=Y Tr!AT-H:S ISA-RUE AND CORREC-COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN U\ANIF.'.OUS(ABSEN- i AND ENTERED ON THE 'INU-ES C=T-E BOARD OF SUPERV.SORS ON THE DA-E AYES: NOES: S^MVN. ABSEN':_ ABS-AIV ATTESTED LO 1r) / O LO I JOHN Ctn1E4.CLERIC OF THE BOARD OF S!�P_RV'SORS AND CO.;:.T Y AO ::V:STRAMR Contact:Uc-e.C natra-3-3-4183 CC: Court, P'cba'Cn Of..c=r County Ac:r^•stra'_r CSA via Probation DEPL,TY . i The 90-day Ranch Aftercare Program utilized three deputies and provided services to 177 male offenders who completed a program at the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility. Like the other three programs, the vast majority of participants (91%) were not arrested for new law violations. and only one individual received a sustained petition for a violent offense during the program intervention period. In conclusion, the aforementioned programs served 1,190 Contra Costa County youth during FY 05/06. It is encouraging to note that during the intervention period, the overwhelming majority of youth were not arrested, l placed outside of their homes or detained in Juvenile Hall. I I I I I I I I i I I I i I REPORT TO THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT JUVENILE JI:STICE CRIME PREVENTION ACT (JJCPA) JULY 19 2005 THROUGH JUNE 309 2006 I Submitted: September.28. _006 Bv: Todd Billeci. Probation Manager _ v i I JUVE\ILE JUSTICE CRIME PREVE\TIO\ ACT SUJIM_ARY OF ACTIVITIES � 2005-2006 BOARD REPORT: The Act requires that the Comprehensive Multi_Agency Juvenile Justice Plan be updated annually-. j which was completed on March '-_. 2006. by the local Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council. With the approval of the Contra Costa Count- Board of Supervisors, the Probation Department has operated this plan the last sit rears of program implementation. Contra Costa County-'s allocation for FY '-00?-2006 was 52..-0.491. The funds allocated by the State have allowed Contra Costa Count- to continue proven programs providing services to the residents of Contra Costa Count-. During the past FY the following programs were funded through the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: • Communit-Probation • School-based Deputy,Probation Officers High School Procram Middle School Program • Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Faeilit-. Aftercare Program This summary presents an analysis of data collected at program entry and data collected six months after program entry. However. minors frequently remain on the caseloads of Deputy Probation Officer(DPO's) beyond the six-month evaluation period exit date. COMMUNITY PROBATION (CP): i Eight Deputy Probation Officers (DPO's) are stationed at police departments throughout the Count- and work closely with police officers to deter minors from further involvement in the criminal justice system. Youth who have violated the law- and reside within the jurisdiction of a city police � department wherein a CP officer is stationed can be assigned to this unit. Having DPO's stationed at various police departments allows Probation to foster positive working relationships with our � community partners, while at the same time holding minors accountable and protecting the public. The data collected be our CP DPO's reveals that the program provided supervision to 3_50 youth between Jul• 1. 2005 and June 30. 2006. The typical participant was a male (81%) about 16 years j old. The demographic breakdown of racial and ethnic backgrounds for the CP caseload was: M White. 31% African American. and 26% Latino. The remaining -% were Asian. Pacific Islander. and Native American or identified as "other'. � I i During the sit months of intervention, the majority of program participants (57%) were not arrested. However-. most arrests that occurred were for probation violations (26%). followed by felony arrests (9%) and misdemeanor arrests (X%). Very few offenders 0%) were arrested for a � violent offenses and no participant received a sustained petition for a violent offense during the i program intervention period. Furtherniore, most participants (65%) did not receive a sustained petition. Of those who did receive sustained petitions. 251 o were for probation violations. 5% for misdemeanors. and 3O0 for felonies. It is also encouraging that only 5% of the offenders were placed outside their homes during the intervention period. While 19% were detained in juvenile hall. this is to be expected for this group of«ards. Mangy° of the minors in the communis-probation unit have serious sustained offenses and require close supervision. However. it is important not to lose sight that only Soo received sustained offenses for newer law violations. SCHOOL BASED DEPUTY PROBATION OFFICERS High School Program: Eleven DPO's are assigned on the campuses of eleven comprehensive high schools throughout the County. These officers spend the majority of their work-day on campus providing support to school administration. staff. students (those on probation and others) and parents. Between Jul- 1, -2_005 and June 30. 20(06 High School Probation DPO's supervised 4.5 participants. The data showed the apical participant was a male. about sixteen rears of age. who came from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds: 39% were African American. 25% were Latino and 25% were White. The remaining II% were Asian. Pacific Islander. American Indian or from "other races. v i The majority of the program participants (SS-' ) were not arrested during the program period. Of the 15% that were arrested. .% were for probation violations. 409 for misdemeanors. and 3% for felonies. Only 2% were arrested for violent offenses. Furthermore. 900 did not receive a sustained petition. Of the 1009 that did receive a sustained petition, 74'9 were for probation violations. 2% for misdemeanors. and 1'"a for felonies. Only 29 o received sustained petitions for violent offenses. It is important to note that only of the offenders were placed outside their homes and 3% were detained in Juvenile Hall during the intervention period. Middle Schools Program: i Four Middle School DPO's split their time among eight middle schools in the Count-. During the evaluation period between July 1. 2005 and June 30, 2006. 188 middle school students participated in the program. The apical participant was a male (65%) and about thirteen rears of age. These children came from different racial and ethnic backgrounds:_ the data shoes 40% were African American, 31% Latino. and 2009 ,,ere White. The remaining 9% were Asian. Pacific Islander, and American Indian or identified as "other'. I The majority of program participants (9?';o) were not arrested during, the program period and for those arrested. 61 were arrested for misdemeanors and 290 for felonies. Onl,,-2% «-ere arrested for violent offenses. Furthermore. 97o of the participants did not receive a sustained petition-, of those who did. 2% received a sustained petition for misdemeanors. and 1% for a felony. 'None of the participants received as sustained petition for a violent offense during the program intervention. Only 1% of the youth were placed outside their homes and 1% was detained in Juvenile Hall during the intervention period. RANCH AFTERCARE PROGRAM: The 90-dae Ranch Aftercare Program utilized three deputy probation officers and provided services to 1'- male offenders who completed a program at the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility. They typical participant ,vas about sixteen years old. Demographic data revealed that about 559% were African American, 25% were Latino. 10% were White. 416 were Asian. and 1% was of mixed ethnic or racial background. The majority- of the program participants (83%) were not arrested during the program period. Of the remaining I .% who were arrested. S% were arrested for probation violations, followed by misdemeanors (60'0) and finally felonies (3)00A Only one offender was arrested for a violent offense during the intervention period. Furthermore. 9110 of the participants did not receive a sustained pet-ion. However. of the sustained petitions, 6%. were for misdemeanors. '00 for felonies, and 290 for probation violations. Only one participant received a sustained petition for a violent offense during the program intervention period. i It should also be noted that no participants were placed outside their homes during the intervention period. I Data on school enrollment after leaving the Ranch reveals that '1% attended comprehensive high schools. 21% had graduated or received their GED. l'OU were enrolled in continuation schools, 119=0 in alternative schools. and 15% «ver;, not enrolled in school. Substance use issues were notable for these offenders. Self-report, parental report and archival data suggests that .690 of the participants had a drug problem at intake and 15690 had an alcohol problem. At exit from the aftercare program I . o had a drug problem and 1090 had an alcohol problem. COUNSELING: To more effectively respond to the needs of clients. S100.000 of the JJCPA funding was designated for the purchase of services on an as needed basis. The goal of this approach is to continue to effectiyel address the service needs of youth on an individual basis by providing meaningful services. CONCLUSION: During fiscal rear 2005 2006 1.190 Contra Costa County youth were -served by Community ' Probation. Middle School. High School. and Ranch :after Care deputies. During the intervention period, the overwhelming maiority of the youth were not arrested. Furthermore. rouQhh_- ')% were placed outside their homes and approximately -90 were detained in Juvenile Hall. 4 I