HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05222001 - D.2 71.
- j• '` .. ``..r ..i;-
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS '; :• CONTRA
F P_ .y rr�;�::. ya:� COSTA
FROM: John Sweeten, County Administrator
►�,, . _ ,:� COUNTY
DATE: May 22, 2001 '•� c ovn t'X
SUBJECT: Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence—Implementation Report
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND,AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. ACCEPT the second quarterly (Jan-Mar 2001) report on the implementation of the Board of
Supervisors' policy of Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence. DIRECT Departments to continue
their work to generate and document the return on investment for these efforts.
2. AFFIRM that the initial "Zero Tolerance" return on investment data is encouraging and represents
progress toward the goals of assisting victims of domestic violence and their families to reduce the
short- and long-term financial, emotional and institutional costs of domestic and family violence
and elder abuse.
3. RECOGNIZE that efforts to hold batterers accountable sooner in the progressive cycle of violence
may lead to significantly lower costs for the law enforcement, justice, health and human..service
systems.
4. ACKNOWLEDGE that the substantive contribution of community organizations serving victims and
children, delivering batterer's treatment and working to prevent elder abuse is an integral part of
the effort to reduce violence and abuse.
5. ACCEPT the County Administrator's report on the progress toward identifying funding to establish
a central coordination function that would oversee the Zero Tolerance initiative, leverage domestic
violence-related funding, identify alternative funding sources and work to unify the wide range of
other domestic/family violence and elder abuse intervention and prevention efforts in the County.
6. ACKNOWLEDGE the importance of the continuing efforts of County Departments, local law
enforcement agencies and community organizations to develop protocols for multidisciplinary
teams and other system improvements to hold batterers accountable, assist victims of domestic
violence/elder abuse and reduce children's exposure to violence.
7. DIRECT the County Administrator to continue to prepare reports on the Zero Tolerance initiative,
with the next report due in August, 2001. '
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _X_YES SIGNATURE:
_-�-RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
i PPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD OW May-22, APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHERXX
See attache/de for Board's action and vote.
VOTE OF SUPERI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNA oU 1 TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact:
ATTESTED May 22, 2001
JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CC" CAO
\ BY DEPUTY
ADDENDUM TO ITEM D.2
May 22, 2001
On this day, the Board of Supervisors considered accepting the second quarterly (Jan-Mar 2001)
report on the implementation of the Board of Supervisor's policy of Zero Tolerance for Domestic
Violence.
Christina Linville, County Administrator's Office, Dr. Jeff Smith, Health Services Department,
Chief Deputy Dave Grossi, Probation Department, and Gloria Sandoval, STAND, (Formally
Battered Women's Alternative) gave the Staffs report and recommendations.
The Board discussed the matter, the public hearing was opened and the following persons
appeared to speak:
Mr. Jim Hicks, AFSCME, 1000 Court Street, Martinez and
Mr. Ralph Copperman, 3 Penrith Walk, Pleasant Hill.
Supervisor Gerber commended staff on the status report, and their work on the Domestic
Violence Program. She moved staff s recommendations and advised that the next staff report
include: examples of qualitative benefits of the program; direction for the Board to continue to
support the Program's needs and efforts; and as Mr. Hicks suggested, a process for dealing with
County staff who may be victims of domestic violence.
Supervisor Glover suggested that the motion include sharing the program with the cities and the
Mayor's Conference. Supervisor Gioia second the motion.
The vote on the motion was as follows:
AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA,GERBER,DeSAULNIER, GLOVER and UILKEMA
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
Sheriff/Coroner
Investigation Division—DomesticViolence
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the.Data
Improve the quality. of misdemeanor and Filing rates for domestic violence misdemeanors
felony domestic violence investigations, and felonies.held steady or rose in first quartet
track domestic violence data for most of the of 2001, (with the exception of misdemeanor
County's law enforcement agencies, and filings, which will not have a reliable calculation
ensure that all restraining orders are until pending case dispositions are known).
promptly entered into the statewide The additiort of a sergeant's position has
database and tracked locally. Ultimate goal: established the Domestic Violence Unit as
reduce repeat offenses of domestic violence. separate from the Persons Crimes Unit. Thus;
DV Unit , personnel are no longer diverted
significantly from the primary focus of
Return on Investment Measures investigating domestic violence cases.
Increased staffing In the DV Unit has also
Baseline--1/1/00-9/30!00 allowed the Sheriff's Department to be better
Misdemeanors represented in a number of DV forums involving
Misdemeanor DV crime reports routed for filing: 297 other police or community agencies.
Number filed by the DA: 33
of total misdemeanors filed: 11%
# investigated by the DV Unit(prior to ZT): 0 Moreover, the DV Unit has expanded their
training (in parMership with Me Distric(
Felonies Attorneys Office) for Patrol staff.. The DV Unit
Number of felonies sent to DA: 238 is seeing ' more thoroughly and better-
Felony filing rate: 54% documented reports from Patrol staff as they
Zero Tolerance--10/1/00-3/31/01 benefit from the tools they received In this
Misdemeanors 10/00- 1/01- additional training.
1ZL4St =
DV crime reports routed for filing: 110 103 The DV Unit addressed and completed two
Number filed by the DA: 24 4* major projects during this quarter:
of total misdemeanors filed: 220/a 7%
*42 cases pending ➢ The 'Resource Information for (lctlms of
Domestic Iro/ence"brochure was updated the
10/00- 1/01- fast update since 1997. The new brochure
12/00 =I contains phone numbers for crisis centers,
Number investigated by the DV Unit: 31 17
Filing rate for DV Unit cases: 58% 71% counseling services, legal assistance, alcohol
DV Unit misdemeanors filed as felonies: 2 3 abuse programs, Children and Family Services
(CFS, which includes Child Protective Services,
or CPS) and STAND!. 10,000 copies will be
Felonies 10/00- 1/01- published and distributed by Patrol deputies at
1 31 each DV-related call.
Number of felonies sent to DA: 54 54
Felony filing rate: 63% 56%
➢ The DV Unit participated in, and helpeo
facilitate, Me development of consensus
approval by 38 stakeholders for the amendea
"Contra Costa County Police Chiefs Association
Policy Guideline for Domestic-V/olence': These
guidelines Include criteria for case referral to
CFS. The Draft Policy Guideline will be.
submitted through the County's Advisory
Council on Domestic Violence (ACAD) to the
Police Chiefs Association for review and
approval.
Note: The most common reason cases are not The Domestic Violence Unit continues to review
Hied by the D/stnlct Attorney is lack o) all domestic violence reports generated from
suffident evidence. Additional investigation Sheriff's Office Patrol Division and Contract
would probably not change the outcome o) Cities:
these cases for filing purposes.
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence.Quarterly Report—May,2001
Sheriff/Coroner.
Division—VictimTechnical Services • •
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Ensure that all Restraining Orders are The number of orders entered into the
promptly entered into the statewide statewide Domestic Violence Restraining Order
database and tracked locally. 1n addition, System (DVROS) in the January-March 2001
domestic violence incidence data will be quarter, if sustained throughout'the year, will
tracked countywide for the purpose of exceed the total number of documents entered
better managing domestic violence cases in 2000. This is especially notable in light of
and gathering statistics to protect victims, Me fact that careful screening of orders prior
reduce the exposure of children to violence to entry for the first quarter of 2001 a/iminateC
530 erroneous, incomplete or duplicative
and hold batterers accountable. entries
lime/iness of Order entry— Orders are
entered the same day as received with few
Return on Investment Measures exceptions. New procedures have been
implemented -to ensure the timeliest entry
possible for holiday weekends
Restraining Orders/Statewide System * Whether all Orders are enhered—In the
Number of DV Restraining Orders entered Into first quarter of 2001, 177 of the 530
DVROS (per CA Dept. of Justice): /
FY 1998-99 4,151 Orders documents received were not entered
FY 1999-00 5,236 into the system, for reasons including
"insufficient information to identify the
As of 1/01-3/01: restrained or protected person", "no orders of
Number of DV Restraining Orders restraint" or "not a court order". The Sheriff's
entered into DVROS 1,400 Office is working closely with the Court to
Proofs of service, etc. entered 243 ensure prompt entry of Orders upon receipt of
Orders received/not entered 530 the amended or missing information.
Total documents handled 2,173 Remaining Orders/documents - not entered
were found to be already entered by. another
agency, a duplicate of an order already
received, a replacement of a fax received from
Sheriff's DV Tracking System the Court, or expired when received.
Countywide felony and misdemeanor DV reports
entered into the data tracking system: Development and installation of technology to
1997 2,927 track domestic violence Protective Orders
1998 4,129 locally and gathers statistics (the "ROSS"
1999 3,328 module) is closer to completion. Manual data
2000 3,287 tracking continues.
1/01-3/01 672
Incidents where children were present: 1,015 Sheriff's IDV T cking System
1998 1,209 From 1/1/01-3/31/01, 703 countyw/de felony
1999 959 and misdemeanor OV reports from 21 county
2000 1,115 law enforcement agencies were received, 672
1/01-3/01 (290/0) 192 of which were entered into the Sheriffs local
data tracking system. Data tracking system
Incidents where drugs and alcohol were involved: links to all law enforcement agencies
1 00 36% countywide are nearing completion and a
1/01-3/01 37% workshop on using the system is planned for
Incidents where there is listed DV history: local law enforcement staff.
1/01-3/01 47%
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence:'Quarta*Report--May,2001
District Attorney
Misdemeanor Prosecutions
Victims • Witness Assistance
�Elder • use- Prosecutions
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Enhance the conviction rate in Misdemeanor Prosecutions
misdemeanor domestic violence cases The District Attorney's Office continues to
and expand capacity to prosecute elder coordinate misdemeanor DV cases through its two
abuse cases. Deputies in place at their two misdemeanor branch
offices. These coordinating Deputies have
conducted two training sessions for other Deputies
handling DV .misdemeanors. One of the
coordinating Deputies also serves in the Domestic
Return on Investment Violence Court. 21 violations of Probation have
Measures been processed through this Court in the first
quarter of 2001.
Domestic Violence Misdemeanors The DA's Office took part in a team effort to study
1999 2000 1 1- domestic violence courts at a conference in New
3/01 York during the first quarter of 2001 (funded by a
Filings: 664 617 177 grant). DA staff have also trained Sheriff's staff,
Conviction rate: 810/6 82% 790/0 Richmond Police,. Health Services and Probation
staff, as well as playing a key role on the DV Death
Domestic Violence Felonies*: Review Committee.
Conviction rate (1/01-3/01): 96%
Victim and Witness Assistance
The two Case Preparation Assistants hired in
December, 2000 have proven invaluable in
Victim and Witness Assistance providing services to DV victims as,well as to DA
Number/rate of victims cooperating in attorneys. Data on the number of. victims
the prosecution of domestic violence cooperating in the prosecution process is pending.
cases: data not yet available
ElderAbuse
Case Preu. Assistants'Activities The Elder Abuse Unit began in January, 2001 and
1/01-3/01 has already logged 14 convictions (7 for tidudary
Subpoenas served: 229 abuse and 7 for physical abuse)in the first quartei
Discovery request assistance: 31 of 2001, induding one state prison sentence. The
Evidence pick-up/delivery: g Unit is. also initiating and/or participating. in a
Tape copying: 19 number of related efforts:
Document requests: 190
Victim transports: 10 ➢ Contra Costa Television legal talk show on Elder
Requests for photographs: 12 Abuse;
➢ Establishment of an elder abuse Hotline
(1-866-ELDER-OK); `
Elder Abuse--1/01-3/01 Development of a multidisciplinary team
Number of convictions: 14 serving elders and vulnerable adults;
➢ Training for Adult Protective- Service workers,
law enforcement agencies;
➢ Development. of a Countywide investigation/
prosecution protocol; and
Development of a FAST (Financial Abuse
*Note: The District Attorney's filing and Specialist.Team).
conviction data are based on point-in-time
summaries of cases at specific points in the
system (filing and conviction). .The DA has
commissioned a data report that allows
compiling of cases as they move ,through their
system, which will allow tracking of conviction
rates for cases filed during the Zero Tolerance
reporting quarters.
Zero Tolerance for CCame5ftc Vie%ce,Quarterly Refi9rt-May 2001
Public Defender
Domestic Violence Defense
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Provide legal representation to The Countywide policy of Zero Tolerance
misdemeanor and felony domestic violence for Domestic Violence has impacted the
defendants (pre-trial, trial and sentencing Public Defender's office both in the
phases of litigation); and provide resulting increase in the number of
representation to offenders in violation of defendants/offenders and in the changes .
probation orders at the post-conviction in procedure necessitated by the
level. centralization of the post-conviction
process.
The PD is involved in 10-15% of the DV
Return on Investment Measures Court cases on matters of probation
failures (non-appearance or, less often,
Percentage of Central-East Countv probation , modification issues). 11
Misdemeanor Clients with Domestic probatlon violation flies were opened in the
Violence Charges: DV Court by the Public Defender's office in
the January-March, 2001 quarter. These
October 2000 12% issues are more complex and labor-
April 2000 20% intensive for PD attorneys and staff. There
are also difficulties associated with DV
Court case numbering that are expected to
be resolved soon.
While .there is not yet supporting data,
anecdotal information indicates an increase
in the number of jury trials in DV cases,
and the rate of PD-represented clients in
misdemeanor cases has nearly doubled,
from 12% in October, 2000 to 20% at the
end of March, 2001.
Zero Tolerance for Lbmewc Violence.Quarterly Report—May,1001
Court
Misdemeanor Post-Conviction Calendar
• • - •
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Address the needs of victims and children The Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Post-
who witness domestic violence, and hold Conviction Calendar, . or "DV Court",
offenders accountable, by focusing continues to expand rapidly as new cases
resources on early intervention efforts in are assigned. Since the Court is operating
post-conviction misdemeanor domestic with limited resources, it will soon be unable
violence cases. to grow further to meet the full need for'
post-conviction misdemeanor services in the
County.
Return on Investment Measures The DV Court Judge and other personnel
Baseline—no data (new activity began attended a national Domestic Violence Court
January, 2001) conference in the past quarter and gained
valuable insight into the partnerships
January Calendar-- needed among Court, law enforcement,
Number of new cases: 40 prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation,
Number of bench warrants issued: 10 victim advocates and social service agencies
to provide a coordinated and effective
response to domestic violence.
1/01-3/01—
Total cases assigned to DV Court: 186 A Civil/Criminal Crossover Committee was
Total bench warrants issued: 25 formed by criminal and family law bench
Offenders taken into custody: 16 officers to address issues associated with
Related/associated cases Identified: 68 aligning the various Orders issued by the
Court. This committee now includes
Juvenile and Probate Judges, Probation,
Family Court Services, Court administrative
staff, law enforcement, representatives from
the DA's Office, criminal defense Bar and
others. The focus is on sharing appropriate
information more efficiently and working to
improve data collection and reporting. In
the meantime, manual procedures have
been developed to ensure that related cases
associated with DV Court are identified and
included in tracking through the DV Court
process.
Zero Tolerance for Gbmesdc violence.Quarterly Repoft-May,200.1
Court
RestrainingRichmond Domestic Violence Restraining Order Clinic Pilot Project/
Order Transmittal t• Statewide •
Prograp Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Reduce/prevent domestic violence by DV Restraining Order Clinic Pilot
providing better access and information for The. Year-End Status Report and . Final
all parties in restraining order actions. Evaluation for the Richmond Domestic
Violence Restraining Order Clinic Pilot
Ensure timely entry of all appropriate shows steadily' increasing numbers of
documents into the Department of Justice individuals served (217 total), services
Domestic Violence Restraining Order provided (249 total) and number of
System (DVROS).- proposed orders prepared (327 total) in
the three full quarters of Clinic operation.
Clinic staff made a total of 266 referrals
Return on Investment Measures to related services'such as other legal
assistance, STAND! or other shelter/
DV Restraining Order Clinic Pilot counseling/ legal services, and the Victim/
3 rd qtr.* 4h qtr. Witness program. 90016 of the individuals
#served surveyed rated Clinic services as good of
Petitioners 66 77 excellent, Finally, ,the Judicial survey
Respondents 6 4 showed.that proposed orders were more
# of services** 78 99 concise for enforcement, better retlectea.
# of referrals 97 121 the victims'safety considerations and that
# of proposed orders prepared: 107 119 proposed Temporary Restraining Orders
better reflected safety concerns fol
children. The Clinic Pilot is now in its
Suuerior Court: Richmond Branch second year of operation
Restraining Order Calendar Data
10/00- 1/01- Transmittal of Orders into DVROS
1&00., 3101:
Total cases 237 225 The Court's collaborative effort with the
# of total cases that are DV: 138 163 Sheriff's Department to carry out a
% of total cases that are DV: 62% 72% protocol which ensures timely entry of all
# of TROs processed appropriate documents and orders into the
through Clinic: 67 61 Department of Justice Domestic Violence
% of total Richmond TROs Restraining Order System (DVROS)
processed through Clinic: 48% 42% continues. Duplicative and erroneous
entries are being prevented and the target
for timely entry Is, with few exceptions,
being met. (See "Sheriff' section of this
*3rd Quarter: 8/00-11/00; 4d'Quarter: 12/00-2/01 report for more Information,)
"Services include outreach, Instructional and
resource materials, referrals to related services,
self-help/assistance completing legal paperwork,
explanations and answering questions about the
restraining order process, addressing concerns and
fears and other assistance.
Zero Tolerance for Domestic violence:Quarterly Report—May,2001
Probation
FelonyMisdemeanor Post....�Conviction .Calendar CDV Court")
p- •
Program
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Hold misdemeanor offenders accountable Misdemeanor Post-Conviction
by actively supervising their probation Domestic Violence Pro4ram
through the Court's misdemeanor post- Newly-assigned Probation staff have established their
conviction calendar. process. Monitor the services as critical elements to the success of the
most violent felony domestic violence County's "DV Court". Misdemeanor offenders are held
offenders through intensive supervision. accountable for meeting the conditions of probation
Establish outreach to victims and their and are able to access supportive services referrals for
children in misdemeanor domestic violence issues such as substance abuse treatment. 21
cases for Victim-Witness Program services. offenders' have violated a condition of probation and
appropriate action has bee1.n taken promptly on all.
A Probation -grant provided funds 'for a group of
Return on Investment Measures Contra Costa representatives (Probation, Court, DA
Misdemeanor Post-Conv. Calendar and STAND!) to attend a nationwide conference on
12/00 3/01 DV Courts, where they learned about best practices
# supervised: 0 89 and the value of collaboration in formulating a
# of repeat offenses: 1 coordinated response to domestic violence earlier in
# of probation,violations: 21 the cycle.
# attending 52-wk program: 62
# of cases reviewed by the Court: 213 In-Custody Batterers Intervention Program
Another collaborative effort has brought DV
Felony intensive Supervision intervention services to the West County Detention
# of violent DV felons intensively supervised: Facility. A total of 25 inmates (23 convicted of
Prior to 1998: 0 DV-related crimes and two with other offenses)
1998: 70 voluntarily attended an orientation and all
1999-2000: 150 indicated they would volunteer for an 8-week
As of 3/01: 185 in-custody DV program if one were offered.
#/rate referred to substance abuse treatment:. Plans are.underway to expand the program to the
Data not available - Main Detention Facility.
Felony Intensive Suyervision
Tracking and collection of data continues to be a
Victim-Witness Program 1/01-3/01: challenge. There is no automated system to extract
# of misdemeanor victim contacts: 160 information such as the number of felony offenders
# qualified for State Victim of Crime Fund: 19 referred to substance abuse treatment. There should
Value of benefits: $972,000 be some data on this and on the rate of probation
Relocation state benefits accessed: $ 10,012 violations by"the next report.
Victim-Witness Program
The newly-hired Victim/Witness Dep. Probation Officer
made 160 contacts with DV victims in . the
reporting quarter, including 97 children. The
DPO is bilingual and served 26 Spanish speakins
victims. 5 families accessed over $10,000 in state
Victims of Crime Compensation Fund relocation
assistance, often fleeing extremely violent and
dangerous circumstances.
While extremely unlikely, it is significant to note that h
all 160 victims qualified to access the entire potentia
benefit for which they.were eligible, over$11,000,OOG
in benefits would be available for services such as
medical care, counseling, relocation and a host of
other needs.
Zero Tolerance for Domestc violence:Quarterly Report—May, 2001
Community-Based Services
Domestic and Family Violence/Elder Abuse
Children's Services,, Victims Services, Elder Services
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Expand the capacity of community-based STAND! Against Domestic Violence and Elder
organizations to serve victims, children and Abuse Prevention are working with various
elders suffering from or at risk of domestic County Departments to plan, develop and
and family violencecarry out critical services to victims of
domestic and family violence and elder
abuse, as well as to children and other family
members.
Return on Investment Measures
STAND! Against Domestic . Violence has
Number of EHS clients referred to STAND!: 56 experienced significant staff impacts
(turnover and expansion) as the
STAND! Job Club presentations: 15 organization's staff strive to meet the
# of participants served: 77 increased need generated by the Zero
EHS Workforce Services staff consultations: 18 Tolerance initiative. Nonetheless, STAND!
Continues to provide a high volume of high-
quality services to the community. Zero-
Tolerance-related services include:
➢ Working to coordinate activities across
Employment and Human Services Bureaus;
Establishing competence thresholds for
training development;
➢ Conducting outreach and identifying
trainers with DV expertise;
➢ Assisting in the training needs assessment
for EHSD staff;
➢ Working with CFS to identify DV Liaison
roles and responsibilities;
➢ Developing job descriptions for DV staff;
➢ Developing STAND!'s Integrated Case
Management function; and
➢ Developing an evaluation plan for all
STAND!/Zero Tolerance-related activities.
Elder Abuse Prevention and STAND! Are
working together to coordinate related
training efforts.
Elder Abuse Prevention is preparing to
provide , individual consultation sessions,
small- and large-group training on specialized
topics and two .'full-day Elder Abuse
Conferences. EAP Isalso planning an
extensive outreach effort to .Increase
knowledge and awareness of elder abuse
issues among EHSD staff, contractors, seniors
and their caregivers. and other community
service providers.
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence:Quarterly Report--May,2001
Employment and Human Services
Children • Family Services
Adult • AgingServices—Elder
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Locate Domestic Violence Liaisons in the 3 Children and Family Services
offices with Children and f=amily Services The Domestic Violence Liaison function is
clients to train CFS staff and ensure that almost fully staffed (2.5 of the 3 allotted
families access all available resources in positions are filled) and the incumbents have
their efforts to reduce and/or eliminate the extensive expertise in their field. Already they
exposure of children to domestic violence. are having a tremendous positive impact, for
both clients and social work staff, as their
Reduce the harmful effects of domestic duties become fully integrated into the
violence on the elderly and other protocols for serving abused and neglected
vulnerable adults by. offering prevention, children and their families. . They offer case
intervention and remediation services. consultation, assess the lethality of potentially
violent situations and help link victims and
Train staff and community service children with critical shelter, counseling and
providers and conduct outreach activities other support services.
to raise community awareness about
available services. DV Liaisons are a tremendous resource for
information, safety planning, batterers'
treatment options and many other community
resources. In addition, they participate in
Return on Investment Measures intra- and interagency meetings with EHS
staff, local law enforcement (serving on the
ACAD Police-Victim subcommittee) and
Children and Family Services: community groups.
Baseline—No data available (new services)
11/00- 1/01- Elder Abuse
12/00. 3m, AAS staff are working with .the District
CFS/DV liaison case consultations: 81 304
Attorney's Office to enhance referral and
Home visits (DV liaison/CFS staff: 34 77 communication protocols and cross-train staff.
In addition, they have developed training
Resource/referral information: 48 98 curriculum and materials for local law
enforcement(POST) training.
AAS staff have also developed an Integrateu
Case Management Pilot for West County that is
Elder Abuse: scheduled to begin June 1, 2001.
(Contracted services not yet provided) Elder Abuse Prevention and STANDI Against
Number of hours of training Domestic Violence ore working with OHS Adult
Number of clients accessing services and Aging Services (AA5) staff to plan and
carry out an extensive training, outreach and
public education Initiative for elders and
vulnerable adults. This initiative includes
workshops around the county, internal staff
training and two full-day conferences designed
to educate and Inform the public on adult
services issues.
The Adult and Aging Service Bureau processed
1,287 referrals related to abuse and neglect of
elders and dependent adults In the period
9/00-6/00. So far this fiscal year they have
received 818 referrals, representing a 2296
increase over last year.
Zero Tolerance for DumeOc Violence:Quarterly Report—May, 2001
Employment and Human Services
Workforce Services
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Reduce the harmful effects of domestic EHSD Workforce Services (WFS) Bureau
violence on CaIWORKs participants and staff continue to work with STAND! Against
their children by providing: on-site Domestic. Violence staff to expand the
domestic violence liaisons offering Antioch Domestic Violence pilot
assistance to identify and develop countywide. In accordance with this plan
employability plans for welfare-to-work and the identified challenge to build
participants who are victims of domestic language capacity for DV functions, 9 of
violence; counseling; access to the 17 Job Club presentations this quarter
victim/children's domestic violence were held in the Richmond office and 2
services; and staff training and presentations were done in Spanish.
consultation.
Also consistent with the long-term plan to
build internal capacity to address domestic
Return-on Investment Measures and family violence issues, STAND! staff
have begun to shift some emphasis from
Baseline: East County Pilot Program direct service to case consultation with
WFS staff. 18 case consultations were
1/01-3/01 held this quarter, with technical assistance
# of referrals to Stand! by WFS.staff: 56 ranging from help writing the employment
# of assessments/safety plans: 27 activities plan to linking CaIWORKs
participants to DV services.
Number of STAND! presentations/
clients reached at Job Club: 17/77
# of case consultations with WFS staff: 18
Number of exemptions for domestic
violence/average length of exemption
Data not available
Challenges: The comprehensive planning
for coordinated activities in EHS has
slowed the process for individual Bureaus,
although the resulting services are
expected to be more effective.
Recruitment of qualified staff, especially
bilingual staff continues to be difficult.
Lack of automated data collection is still an
issue.
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence.Quarterly Report—May,2001
Health Services
ViolenceFamily • Project
Program Outcome Statement Story Behind the Data
Train. medical residents, and build the During the previous quarter, Dr. Jeff Smith
capacity of Health Services programs to met with Family Violence Prevention Project
address violence among clients in Health (FVPP) staff to plan Medical Resident training,
Services and contractor agency settings. which has been designated as a training
priority. Medical Resident training was
planned to include mock patient interviews,
three probem-based learning sessions on a
Return on Investment Measures range of DV issues and DV-relateo
enhancements to the current Community
Medical Service Provider Training: Medicine rotation. Dr. Smith's report is
Baseline: 1998-9 separate from this update on the overall
Number of Ambulatory Care Clinic staff progress of the Department of Health
trained: 100 Services comprehensive, collaborative. effort
to address domestic violence.
2000:
Number of staff trained 165 Mental Health Services Provider training
Number of training sessions 2 through the FVPP continued in the second
Participant satisfaction/learning (not yet compiled) quarter of Zero Tolerance reporting with a
second session entitled "Clinical Assessment
and Intervention for Domestic Violence. 90
Access to DV Services: staff attended.
Number of referrals to STAW s Emergency
Response Team by Health Services Providers Other FVPP activities include updating the
FY 99 28 Health Services Guidelines for Domestic
FY 2000 47 Violence Screening and Reporting protocol,
FY 2001 Q quarters only) 88 which is scheduled for completion by June,
2001, and continuing patient outreach..ano
information efforts through making posters
and informational material readily available at
patient care sites.
Baseline data is now available for referrals by
area health care centers to the STAND!
Emergency Response Team. Referrals in
2000 were significantly higher than in 1999
and are up significantly again for the current
fiscal year.
Zero Tolerance for Gbmest/c Violence.'Quarterly Report—May,2001.
OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF WARREN E. RUPF
Contra Costa County Sheriff
Field Operations Bureau Kathryn J. Holmes
Investigation Division 313-2600 Undersheriff
Date: April 23, 2001
To: Kathryn J. Holmes, Undersheriff
From: Commander Tom Moore, Field Op t'o
Subject: Domestic Violence Program- arterly Status Report
INVESTIGATION DIVISION-DOMESTIC VIOLENCE UNIT SERVICES:
January 1, 2001 began the second quarter of operation of the Investigation Division
Domestic Violence Unit. The Unit is now fully staffed with one Sergeant, two Detectives,
one Sheriffs Specialist, and one full time Senior Clerk. The DV Unit continues to focus
its investigative efforts on all felony cases and priority misdemeanor cases. Our data
tracking clerk enables the unit to enter domestic violence related reports from all police
jurisdictions in the County into the Domestic Violence Data Tracking System in an
expedient manner. Our Sheriffs Specialist continues to be very active in maintaining
contact with all local law enforcement agency, DV representatives. She also coordinates
and attends meetings and training sessions with other county agencies, such as Children's
and Family Services, Probation, and STAND.
The addition of a sergeant's position has legitimized the domestic violence investigative
team as a unit. Prior to the addition of the sergeant's position, domestic violence
investigators were a part of the Person's Crimes Unit. This detracted from the primary
focus of investigating domestic violence cases. Detectives were often assigned other
person's crime cases in addition to domestic violence cases. With the addition of
personnel dedicated specifically to the DV program, the unit has become a specialized
investigative team that focuses solely on domestic violence cases. The sergeant
represents the unit as a supervisor/management member who has the ability and authority
to address issues with other members of the Sheriffs Office on a supervisory level. This
has created the ability to address policy and procedural issues and work quality issues
with Patrol Division. The sergeant's position gives the Office of the Sheriff supervisory
representation at a number of DV related meetings, which are attended by other law
enforcement representatives and other county agency representatives.
The Domestic Violence Unit continued training Sheriff's Office Patrol Division personnel
on updated laws and investigative procedures. At the Patrol Division sergeant's quarterly
training class in January, the Domestic Violence Unit provided a two-hour training session
for all patrol sergeants. Deputy District Attorney Lynn Uilkema was included in the training
session and provided relevant information to the investigative process, from the
perspective of the District Attorney's Office. The Domestic Violence Unit also provided a
two-hour training session for a Sheriffs Office Patrol re-entry class. Newly promoted patrol
sergeants and patrol trainees attended this class. Deputy DA Uilkema also provided
training during this session.
The training provided by the Domestic Violence Unit has made a positive impact on the
way domestic violence cases are now being investigated by Patrol Division. It is apparent
that patrol deputies are conducting more thorough initial investigations and the
documentation that follows is much more complete than it has been in the past. Patrol
deputies are more aware that follow up investigation on misdemeanor cases is their _
responsibility. The DV specific training has provided the patrol deputies the tools they f
need to conduct a more .thorough investigation. The realization that a specialized
investigative unit will be handling follow up investigation and filing of cases with the District
Attorney's Office has created an attitude that Greater effort creates greater results."
The DV Unit addressed and completed two major projects during this quarter. The unit
completed updating and reproducing the Resource Information for Victims of Domestic
Violence brochure; and was successful in establishing agreeable guidelines for the County
Police Chief's Association Policy Guideline for Domestic Violence. This project included
negotiating the criterion for case referral to Child Family Services.
The domestic violence resource brochure was rewritten and updated from its previous
publishing in 1997. The new brochure includes updated phone numbers for crisis centers,
counseling services, legal assistance, alcohol abuse programs, Children and Family
Services, and STAND (formerly BWA). The brochure also provides useful information on
police protection and legal information as it relates to domestic violence. This new
brochure has been sent out to publishing and 10,000 copies will be delivered to all
Sheriffs Office patrol station houses. Patrol deputies will provide victims of domestic
violence these resource pamphlets in the field during the course of their initial
investigations.
Over the last several months the DV Unit has been involved in discussions to amend the
Contra Cost County Police Chiefs Association Policy Guideline for Domestic Violence.
These guidelines include criteria for case referral to CFS. These discussions have taken
place during Advisory Committee Against Domestic Violence (ACAD)-Police Victim's
Relations meetings. Attending these meetings were officials from numerous local police
agencies, representatives from the District Attorney's Office, County Probation, Child
Family Services, and STAND. Initial drafts of the proposed referral criteria were met with
differing opinions and some opposition. After several meetings had concluded without
progress, this unit volunteered to rework the initial guideline proposal and submit the draft
to all involved parties prior to the next meeting. 38 copies of this proposal were sent out
for review and consensus approval has been met.
The Domestic Violence Unit continues to review all domestic violence reports generated
from Sheriff's Office Patrol Division and Contract Cities. I n addition to handling follow up
investigation on all felony cases, several priority misdemeanor cases were identified and
handled through to filing by this unit. Severity of the incident, previously reported incidents
and the criminal history of the parties involved identified priority misdemeanor cases.
Several of the cases generated from the Contract Cities were not investigated by this unit
but were sent back to the agencies with recommended investigative follow up procedures.
During the first quarter of 2001 Sheriffs Office County Patrol wrote a total of 174 domestic
violence reports. 54 of these cases were felonies; 120 were misdemeanors. 132 cases
were referred to the. District Attorney for review. No charges were filed in 86 of these
cases. 42 cases are still pending a disposition from the District Attorney's review.
The following is a breakdown of the statistical data of felony cases and misdemeanor
cases handled by the Sheriffs Office Investigations Division.
Felony Domestic Violence:
54 cases referred to District Attorney for review
30 cases filed with criminal charges
24 cases with no charges filed (NCF)
56% filing rate for felony cases
Misdemeanor Domestic Violence handled by the Domestic Violence Unit:
17 cases referred to District Attorney for review
12 cases filed with criminal charges— (3 cases upgraded to felony charges)
5 cases with no charges filed (NCF)
71% filing rate for misdemeanor cases selected and reviewed by the DV Unit
Misdemeanor Domestic Violence handled by Misdemeanor Complaints:
103 cases submitted to Misdemeanor complaints
61 cases submitted to the District Attorney for review
42 cases pending disposition of District Attorney review
4 cases filed with criminal charges
57 cases with no charges filed (NCF)
7% filing rate for misdemeanor cases (handled by Misdemeanor complaints Office)
OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT
r:
'anus" : 200:1
• Full time clerk begins assignment.
• Data Tracking System diagnostic check for inaccuracies and inconsistencies.
• Multiple identifier codes and data entry errors identified.
• Begin updating data tracking system 1999—2000.
• Identified problem with data tracking link to countywide law enforcement agencies.
• Developed plan with technical services to re-link agencies to D.V. tracking system.
• Initiated plan with calls and letters to each agency.
• Attend ACAD sub-committee meetings: Death Review Team, Police Victims Relations, 2001 ACAD
Conference Planning Committee
• Submitted Quarterly Status Report.
• Enhancement Proposal from Tiburon for changes to the entry screen for D.V. System sent and
received.
• Letter to law enforcement agencies countywide outlining the benefits to sending their D.V. report for
entry into the D.V.Tracking System.
• Attend Grant Committee Meeting
•, Daily DV Tracking with CFS
• Notification flyers to all law enforcement agencies &support agencies about the Police Victims
Relations Committee meeting.
• Obtained 15 reports from the Coroners Office for the 2001 Death Review studies.
• Began and completed data collection forms for the 15 reports for the Death Review studies.
• Obtained related Domestic Violence police reports from other law enforcement agencies including out
of state.
• Obtained criminal histories on responsibles for Death Review studies.
• Distributed copies of the completed data collection forms to team members.
• Hosted Police Victims Relations Committee.
• Create and maintain County-wide Domestic Violence report log of DV reports received from law
enforcement agencies for entry into the data tracking system.
• Total Inter-agency Domestic Violence Reports received 310
• Total Domestic Violence Reports entered 220
FARMAR 2p;Q1
• Continued data collection for Death Review Team Study.
• Continue to update data tracking system inaccuracies and inconsistencies 1997.7, 1998
• Attend ACAD sub-committee meetings: Data Committee, Police Victims Relations,ACAD Conference
Planning Committee.
• Notification flyers to all law enforcement agencies &support agencies regarding the Police Victims
Relations Committee meeting.
• Update resource information for the department's D.V. brochure—"Resource Information for Victims
of Domestic Violence."
• Hosted Police Victim Relations meeting.
• Maintain County-wide Domestic Violence report log of DV reports received from law enforcement
agencies for entry into the data tracking system.
• Total Inter-agency Domestic Violence Reports received 176
• Total Domestic Violence Reports entered 181
March 100;1
• Attend ACAD sub-committee meetings: Data Committee, Police Victims Relations, ACAD Conference
Planning Committee.
• Notification flyers to all law enforcement agencies & support agencies regarding the Police Victims
Relations Committee meeting.
• Hosted Police Victim Relations meeting
• Created new Resource Information for Victims of Domestic Violence Brochure.
• Attended San Francisco Regional Domestic Violence Council Meeting.
• Maintain countywide domestic violence report log of DV reports received from law enforcement
agencies for entry into the data tracking system.
• Submitted report to Police Victim Relations Committee membership on the Domestic Violence
Protocol, Children and Family Services Referral Guidelines— Duty to Report.
• Total Inter-agency Domestic Violence Reports received 217
• Total domestic violence reports entered 179
• Total inter-agency domestic violence reports received January 2001 through March 2001, 703
• Total domestic violence reports entered into the DV tracking system January 2001 through March
2001, 580
•n dG o o C�
N Q
N o
✓ t� {DIt
x2
w °' 1 °d ✓ rn cn io f w
n 4 N S o
� A N n � J N. � 6 'yam O `y 'c�' `" r• � o o � �`'
� fo � ✓ ra o � � � .� c,.c �a 0' rz 7
00 UQ
Y. vC"j�� y ✓ N -Oo
m o Pap o
14
l^ICyYY w 00
up 1 00
so
N ✓ 3 o a N n 3G o .s G �G
r-`r `1' c?` ,• ✓ °tj
GG N a d n Q=n N N u, �tl ✓' ✓.
co co N 4 co + '�.• O C/�
tZ
vo � rnno
.amu G? o T ' ° "� C� � � ' N N N � a ! ✓3 G GN
N N d`t' d o p
0 3a N �p ? �w d✓y rV}," �:�G v' E; Nar N a o '
V^O o o co
a Q t sp W
� 7�, NGc�oo �� opc°oj � `fl C10
r+ .G o r"' N !C'' O• ." d N G ° �y co r• ,-n.G v� O
N O o N N *jj n r�d� Os1 o ciA oo 7 G ^ G p 04 n N d cA m W ✓
:°+ a 3 G `'� �'+r j ✓ co p co RD a cNn in n O G
O A O.�y G/1 N r•!+ O^ ✓ ps ..C, N �G
GcNo '0O
Cho
.• �� v•co � �i� � Qn
7 G G G 4
� ✓ "� �, N � � � N � O-�Bio p O Nri
� w
SH
lot
Q
' :.
Q o b *CA ht
C`
n
TECHNICAL SERVICES DIVISION-VICTIM PROTECTION:
Staffing:
The Office of the Sheriff was allocated two positions to assist it in its role as the
recipient of all restraining orders issued in the county. One of these positions was filled
in November, 2000 and the new staff member began working in early December.
Training was substantially completed prior to January 1, 2001. The second position is
still vacant. Interviews have been conducted and more are scheduled. It is expected
that this position will be filled shortly.
Data Tracking:
At this time "comparative data" is only of a general nature. However, if the first quarter
of"full operation" is fair sample, the following information can be considered quite
useful for all parties involved in the Zero Tolerance Program.
♦ Past:
Restraining Orders (All types) entered in DVROS (CLETS) (per Calif. Dept. of Justice):
Sheriff's Office All other Agencies Total
FY 1998/99 1,083 3,168 4,151
FY 1999/00 2,340 2,896 5,236
♦ Present:
Restraining Orders Received by the Office of the Sheriff:
Orders/Documents Received January 1 to March 31, 2001:
TRO/OAH/EPO (Domestic Violence): 594 (9.6/day)
Criminal Protective Orders: 372 (6/day*)
Other orders (Civil, Workplace, Juvenile, etc.) 434 (7/day)
(*Court/business day)
Orders Entered DVROS (CLETS) 1,400 (22.6/day)
Proofs of Service, etc: 243 (4/day)
♦ Orders/Documents Received, Not Entered:
Already Entered by Other Agency: 93
Expired When Received: 18
Duplicate of Order Already Received: 179
Replacement of Fax rec'd from Court: 63
Other Defect: 177
Total Orders/Documents Received, Not Entered 530
Note: "Other defect" can include: insufficient information to identify the restrained
person or protected person; the order contained no orders of"restraint"; the document
was not a court order.
Total Documents Received and Handled: 2.173
Performance:
There are two measures of performance in regard to the foregoing. First is the
timeliness of entry. Second is whether all orders are entered.
♦ Typically, all restraining orders and proofs of service are entered in DVROS the
same day they are received at the Office of the Sheriff. Procedures have been
put into place for the use of facsimile machines to avoid excessive lag time
caused by holiday weekends.
♦ With some exceptions Family Law and Civil Court restraining orders and
Emergency Protective Orders received are entered into DVROS. Exceptions
may be caused by having insufficient information to identify the restrained
person (usually lack of date of birth) or by receipt of the order after expiration.
Comparison of the current rate of receipt and entry of orders by the Sheriffs
Office against historical data from DOJ for numbers of entries in DVROS
(CLETS) from the county as a whole shows a slight increase (projected) in
entries this year.
Programming and Software:
Significant modifications to existing software have been specified, or are being
designed. That which has been specified has been contracted for and delivery is
dependent on the software vendor's ability to produce. In the meantime, however, the
Office of the Sheriff is and will continue to accomplish its part of the primary objectives
of the program.
TWSD/dm
a 0 o o 0
N CD (D N cY) d
u
U
m N N O e- O 00
O t� C-
0') cp In r
O
U
�o
0
w
c
W
E
a�
4 c
O v o
c
Z
co w
CL
p z O �
W U) Co
f-- N U Z: a o
d Q co >
~
W z O U ca L
M
p' V Y - w 0
ui
V U ° O L W
Q > z j coi
WO W W U \...- i
...1 z Q' Lr 1-- �. a�-ter 1\ �'+ cc
W (n '� v i kPea U
(A LU
C7 O O r�• (1
f-' O z Q 3r o U) U w `/ C ro
LL 114 F-
Q N w z w J V ¢
O O
W 'r' > n' D �? W m
U U O ° w u w a =
LLLL Q a z w 0 _ 2� w
0 :0 c0 O � Q ~ o
z LU w w (1) W W V 0.
Q W W z w W q)
W w Cl) H CO H H rj
o c
cn z W W W W w L Q
w O a o O. O o
—iW U U U U U A
O w z z z z z
U O O O O O O
U) W W W W W W
W m LA m CA m ca
O � D Z) D D
O z z z z z z y
15
J J J J J J J
0 0 0 0 O 0 0
Office Of District Attorney Contra Gary T.Yancey
District Anorney
Central/Eastern Costa
Area Operations Division
10 Douglas Drive Count�
Suite 130
Martinez, Californla 94553-4077
(925) 646-2625
Fax, (925) 646-2524
r a
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Christina Linville, County Administrator' s Office
FROM: Robert J. Kochly, Assistant Chief Deputy District
Attorney
DATE: April 30, 2001
SUBJECT: Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Quarterly
Report
At the District Attorney's Office, our Deputy District
Attorney misdemeanor domestic violence coordinators remain
in place at each of our two misdemeanor branch offices . We
filed 177 misdemeanor domestic violence cases for the first
quarter of 2001 . For the same time frame we recorded a
conviction rate of 78 . 8% . By contrast, our conviction rate
on our felony domestic violence cases for the same time
frame was 96%. However, we are still using "point in time"
reports from DOIT to measure conviction rates, which means
we cannot isolate the conviction rate for cases filed since
the inception of Zero Tolerance. We are continuing to work
with DOIT to achieve a more useful report format, and
believe we will have that available by the next quarterly
report.
Our misdemeanor coordinators have also conducted two
training sessions for our misdemeanor deputies, one at each
of our two branch offices . Those training sessions were
designed to educate our deputies on the workings of the new
misdemeanor Domestic Violence Court. In that new court, one
of our misdemeanor coordinators attends every session and
assists the court in every way possible. Through the end of
Page Two
April 30, 2001
the first quarter, 2001, 89 domestic violence cases have
been referred. We have already processed 21 violations of
probation, which means the offenders are being held strictly
accountable. We also sent Joe Motta, the head of our
Domestic Violence Unit, and Lynn Uilkema, one of our
misdemeanor coordinators, to New York for a conference on
Dedicated Domestic Violence Courts, along with other members
of the Domestic Violence Court "team" here in ..our county.
We have been active in other areas involving training
and collaboration in the Domestic Violence arena as well.
During the first quarter we have conducted two Domestic
Violence training sessions for the Sheriff ' s Office. We have
conducted six training sessions for the Richmond Police
Department. We also conducted one training session for a
combined Health Services/Probation Department group. The
office also continues to work with our other partners in the
Domestic Violence field through ACAD. We are active
participants on a number of ACAD sub-committees, including
Police and Victims, Statistics, Conference Planning,
Crossover, as well as being a key player on the Domestic
Violence Death Review Committee.
Our Case Preparation Assistants, now in place since
early December, 2000, have proven invaluable in providing
services to domestic violence victims, as well as our
attorneys . From their inception through the first quarter,
2001, the Domestic Violence CPA's have personally served 229
Domestic Violence subpoenas, assisted attorneys on 31
discovery requests, handled evidence pick-up and delivery
on 9 cases, done tape copying on 19 cases, handled 190
requests for documents, done 10 victim transports, and
processed 12 requests for photographs . Each of these tasks
is invaluable in achieving a successful prosecution in a
Domestic Violence case.
On the Elder Abuse front, our fledgling unit has been
incredibly active and successful . During the first quarter,
2001, we have already obtained 14 elder abuse convictions (7
involving financial abuse and 7 involving physical abuse) ,
Page Three
April 30, 2001
including 1 state prison sentence. We currently have 6
active cases being handled by the Elder Abuse Unit (4
involving physical abuse and 2 involving financial abuse) ,
as well as 2 other active misdemeanor cases reviewed and
filed by the Elder Abuse Unit and referred for handling to
our misdemeanor branches . Another 16 investigations ( 12
involving financial abuse and 4 involving physical abuse)
are currently pending within the unit, some of which will
become filed cases within the near future.
Training and community outreach have also been
priorities within this new unit. During the first quarter,
we have participated in a CCTV legal talk show on Elder
Abuse, attended an open house for Elder Abuse Prevention,
and established an Elder Abuse Hot Line ( 1-666-ELDER-OK) .
We have attended monthly meetings for a new
Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) , and met with supervisors at
both APS and the Public Guardian. We have conducted a legal
training for APS workers on criminal prosecutions . We have
also conducted one training for Concord Police Department
detectives, as well as one joint law enforcement training
attended by officers from the Antioch, Lafayette, Orinda,
and Walnut Creek Police Departments. We have ambitious
plans to conduct a number of other training sessions this
year, with law enforcement and financial institutions, as
well as work on a number of other collaborative efforts such
as a county wide investigative/prosecution protocol and
development of a FAST (Financial Abuse Specialist Team) .
OFFICE. OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
800 Ferry Street
Martinez, California
Date: April 2492001
To: David Coleman, Public Defender
From: Jack Funk, Assistant Public Defender
SUBJECT: Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Program Impacts
Program Outcome Statement
Provide legal representation to those offenders in violation of probation orders
concerning the domestic violence court.
Provide representation to those defendants accused of misdemeanor charges
concerning domestic violence pre-trial, trial, and sentencing phases of litigation.
Return on Investment Measures
Probation Violation Files Opened in the Domestic Violence Court
Month Cases Opened
January 2001 Two
February 2001 Four
March 2001 Five
April 2001 Not yet complete
Percentage of Central-East County Misdemeanor Clients with Domestic Violence
Charges
Month Percentage D.V. Clients
October 2000 (baseline) 12%
April 2001 20%
Narrative Interpreting the Data
The countywide police of Zero Tolerance in Domestic Violence area has created
departmental impacts in two separate areas. The most obvious change is the resource and
staff allocation required to defend cases involved in the special domestic violence court.
The second area of impact occurs in the pre-existing negotiation and trial system in the
branch courts.
Since January 5, 2001, the special domestic violence court has been in operation
handling targeted misdemeanor cases which are strictly supervised on a formal probation
basis. In keeping with the departmental protocol, we are referred cases when there are
probation failures on these matters, either due to non-appearance (bench warrants) or
substantive failure of probation requirements, or on occasion, probation modification
issues. To date we are involved in 10-15% of the cases in that court.
It should be noted that those cases are the most problematic in that they are the
offenders who are now in further trouble due to their failures to comply. The resolution
of such cases involves probation modification or probation violation hearings which,
again, are more time consuming than the routine matters on that calendar. On occasion
the violations concern new offenses, and these cases result in either a"petition in lieu" of
new charges or a coordination with the newly filed charges themselves to achieve
resolution. Most of these clients are in custody and of course require intake interviews at
the facility where they are housed, as well as jail visits during the pendency of the case.
Also witness contacts and investigation are often necessary to achieve a coordinated
courtroom presentation. Lastly, the clerical organization for the domestic violence court
presents a unique problem in that the cases are still assigned case numbers which
correspond to the outlying judicial districts yet the appearances are centralized in
Martinez. We expect to have a new system in place soon.
With regard to the impacts of the Zero Tolerance policy in the outlying courts,
most of the information is anecdotal. Nonetheless, there does appear to be an increase in
the number of jury trials in the judicial districts covered by my deputies (Mount Diablo,
Walnut Creek-Danville, and Delta) fueled by domestic violence cases. Further, such
cases by their nature require more investigative interviews, and the number of
investigation requests for these types of cases is relatively high. The percentage of
clients whom we represent with misdemeanor charges involving domestic violence has
grown dramatically from 12%to 20% since our baseline count in October of 2000.
Restraining Order Clinic
100 37th Street
Richmond,CA 94805
B. Description of Restraining Order Clinic Participants: 4th Quarter (510)374-3364
Clinic Participants'Type of Relationship Primary Language of Clinic Participants j
Married,
Married filed j
for Laotian j
Dissolution,
Child in Spanish 1%
Common Formerly 19%
r Married
36% '
A; 21%
ti
M. .
Current& Current or `
Former Past
CohabitantsRelated by Dating/Engag
j 0% Blood, ement Engilsh
21% 80%
Marriage,or j
Adoption
— 22%
Clinic Participants'Source of Income Ethnicity of Clinic Participants
Asian/Pacific
40 35 Islander
35. Caucasian 4%
30 20%
25 Hispanic i
20 24%
15 8 8 7 10 12
Work AFDC SS SSI GA Other Over
Income African
Total Clinic Participants=81 American
-...- 52% _ ..
Gender of Clinic Participants T Age of Clinic Participants
Male Elders(65+)
9% 13%
Adults(18-54)
Female 87%
91%
No minors were assisted in this quarter.
Clinic Participants' City of Residence
60
50 48
40
30
20
11
10 4 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 1
0 --,
v o d o a m Em v
0 o a c o E c CD m
E � ti w .0 Uf3 0 p a o o
a Lu = U O
Total Clinic Participants=81
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bay Area Legal Aid and Contra Costa County Superior Court.
BayLegal subcontracts with STAND!to accept referrals from the Clinic.
Restraining Order Clinic
100 37"Street
Richmond,CA 94805
(510)374-3364
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER CLINIC
4th Quarter Program Statistics
(December 2000— February 2001)
A. Clinic Services
1" 2"`!0 3rd 0 4`h Tota!
Total Number of Clinics 01 38-- 35 40 113
Total Number of Petitioner's Clinics 27 23 29 79
Total Number of Respondents Clinics 11 12 11 34
Total Number of Clinic Participants Served Goal=75 0 66 70 81 217
Participants in Petitioners Clinic3 61 66 77 204
Participants in Respondents Clinic 6 6 4 16
Total Number of People Helped 0 214 241 248 703
Total Number o Services Provided 0 72 78 99 249
Total Number of Referrals 0 48 97 121 266
Family Law Facilitator's Office 9 22 18 49
Lawyers Referral Service 10 24 25 59
STAND (counseling/shelter) 6 9 18 33
STAND (legal services, other than restraining orders) 0 0 9 9
Legal Services or Seniors 2 0 0 2
International Institute or the East B (immigration) 3 0 2 5
Battered Women Employed(employment) 2 18 8 28
Victim-Witness 5 20 33 58
Other 11 4 8 23
Total Number of Proposed Orders Prepared 0 101 107 119 327
t No direct services were provided in the first quarter. Program development only.
2 In the 2nd Quarter,one person was assisted in both the petitioners clinic and the respondents clinic. This litigant was
counted as one person served.
s In the 3'd Quarter,two people were assisted in both the petitioners clinic and the respondents clinic. These litigants were
counted as two people served.
°See-footnotes#2 and#3.
S Total number of participants served includes participants assisted by STAND!
6 Total number of people helped includes children,household members or other people protected by the restraining order.
Total number of services provided represents the total number of services provided to all Clinic participants. Some Clinic
participants receive assistance in one contact. Others come back to the Clinic multiple times for additional assistance.
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bay Area Legal Aid and Contra Costa County Superior Court. BayLegal subcontracts with
STAND!to accept referrals from the Clinic.
BAY AREA LEGAL AID
_ CENTRAL SUPPORT OFFICE
405 14T"STREET,9T"FLOOR
OAKLAND,CA 94612
'ISL:(510)6634755
FAX:(510)6634710
tet6h7 P.AREAS -
Z4;fIDEM'/4ECUTIVEDIRECTOR
April 18, 2001
C'-farice:L3ush
Court Spices Administrator
Qijtra-:C�bsta County Superior Court
"TM 61"n Street
Maftinez, CA 94553
RE: Domestic Violence.Restraining Order Clinic
-.Dear Ms. Bush:
Enclosed please find the Year-End Status Report and Final Evaluation for the Domestic
Violence Restraining Order Clinic, as well as several documents that were attached to
them: I am forwarding these to you per your request to Jane Whitfield, for use.in
preparing the Zero Tolerance Commission Report. If you have any questions, or-need..
anything further, do not hesitate'.to.contact me at (510) 663-4755 ext.229.
Sincerely, = '
s \..
Lauren O'Brien
Grants and Contracts Coordinator
Enc. 6
THE LEGAL SERVICES TRUST FUND COMMISSION
EQUAL ACCESS^FUND-PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.. .
Year End.Status Report and Statistics
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PRO PER CLINIC
A-Collaboration between
Bay Area Legal Aid and
Contra Costa Superior Court
The Domestic Violence Restraining Order Clinic ("Clinic") assists people in Contra Costa Countv with
limited financial resources in domestic violence restraining order actions. y
• Year End Status Report -
Project Implementation: In May 2000;•,Bay Area Legal Aid ("Bay Legal") collaborated with
Contra Costa Superior-Court ("Co-urf.')-to=developr a protocol that sets-forth Clinic operational
procedures, including program procedures in the Clinic, processing procedures in the Clerk's
Office and referral procedures with Stand Against-DomestfopViolence (`'Stand"). Since the
Clin'ic's inception, the collaborating partners have fine tuned orational processes-and revised
the protocol. Please see attached.revised Protocol. -
The Clinic operates out of Richmond Superior Court.-,Initially, the ClQc provided 5 ivices_out
of a single office. One of the challenges faced' by the Clinic,.xluring this:.-g.rant was
overcoming the limitations of the Clinic location: -As. demand for services::quickly_-increased,
operating out of one office limited the. number of:litigants::the_Clinic coui .assist:_ ,A A.result,.
in February 2001. BayLegal and the.Court collaborated tccrestruct ire_tl e-spore available to the
Clinic, enabling the Clinic to assist more litigants.� While. the .Clinic still pperaNrbut of the
same safe and confideiztial location, the Clinic now has two:private-. ntbYPtew--roams and a
waiting area. The watzne area is a comfortable and emotionally safe::enyironmeritvhere pro
per litigants.can ..fill b'ut�their paperwork;-obtain informational fact sheets.and-community
resources from a resource:,board;.:andwatch-_educatiQnal; and informational videos about
restraining orders and domestic violence ' The waiting area also has a Kid's Corner , with a.
child-sized table and chairs and various..toys to. keep` children engaged while the pro per
litigants receive assistance. These improvements:enabled the Clime to provide more effective
information and assistance as well as to assist more people, so that we are now exceeding our.
quarterly client goals.
Direct Services: Upon initial implementation, the Clinic provided assistance to pro per
petitioners on Mondays and Fridays, between 8:00am and 1:30pm. In order to meet the
demand for assistance, the Clinic expanded its hours in January of 2001. The Clinic is now
open to provide individual, one-on-one assistance to pro per petitioners in a safe, confidential
location in the Richmond Courthouse, on Mondays and Fridays between 8:00am and 3:30pm
(Clinic staff usually works until 4:00pm or 5:00pm). The Clinic also facilitates a workshop to
pro per respondents every Thursday from 3:00pm to 5:00pm in the Jury Assembly Room at the
Richmond Courthouse. All pro per litigants receive same-day assistance, unless they prefer to
make an appointment at a later date, agreed upon by both the litigant and Clinic staff.
I
The Clinic is facilitated by an attorney. who along with law-clerks. assisfs pro peri '(Yants to
complete applications and responses-- for .restrairifng orders, reviews pleadings to' ensure
completeness and. appropriateness for filing, prepares proposed orders, and provides
information to litigants about restraining.-:order actions, court procedures and :relevant
community resources. Through the Clinic,: pro per litigants also receive instructional and
informational resource materials. :...
Outreach, Instructional and Resource Materials: During early implementation of thi: Clinic,
BayLegal and the Court collaborated to design outreach materials, which included a poster-and
informational pamphlet, for distribution to various community agencies. Please see _attached
outreach materials. Outreach materials are currently being_translated into Spanish.
BayLegal has developed and gathered a variety of written and audio-visual instructional and
resource materials for use and distribution -to.pro per_litigants in the Clinic. Audio-visual-
materials are provided in both English and Spanish. The.Clinic is currently working to provide
written resource materials in languages other--than Enghs4i Clinic materials are. listed. in.the L
attached protocol.
Collaboration with Contra . Costa Superior Court:. BayLegal and the .Court;:,,have...:
collaborated throughout the implementation process, including project planning and protocol
development, creation of outreach.materials, translation of outreach:materials, .acquisition of
additional funding and project evaluation. An ongoing relationship enables.-BayLegal and the
Court to collaboratively address emerging issues.
Collaboration with...Other Service: PxQvide.rs:_:The_:Ciinic_has made many refe.�-rals to-other.- '
service providers, .including. but not-.:limited-to;'.-Stand (counseling/shelter, :I�M bono legal .
services. .domestic. vib lence treatment .,program), Family—Law ;Bacilita#on_":Lavvyers.:Referral.
Service, Legal Services for Seniors,. International Institute`.of the;East Bay, Battered.Womeh.
Employed, Victim-Witness and otherrelevantservice.agencies. Please seer Yeah�nd;Statistics.
for information regarding.frequent referrals made by;the Clinic:
Project Evaluation:- .P.,.ursuanf_ to BayLegdt's EvaluatiQn Plan, Bay—Legal-levaiu ied;_tla
performance of the Clinic with.-statistical analysis, participant satisfaction;.ques.tonnaize�=arid;*
judicial survey. BayLegal collected:.and analyzed.extensive statistical:.data.regarding,the: pro
per litigants assisted. Please see:'Year�End Statistics below.
In January 2000, BayLegal mailed 170 participant satisfaction questionnaires to safe addresses
of pro per litigants (both petitioners and respondents) assisted through December 2000. Please
see attached sample participant satisfaction questionnaire. BayLegal received a total of 38
returned evaluations, 29 of which were completed. Of the responding participants. 90% (26)
rated their overall experience with the Clinic as excellent or good. The evaluations indicated
that, as a result of the assistance and information received in the Clinic:
• 79% (23) of Clinic participants stated they had more information about their legal
rights;
• 72% (21) of Clinic participants stated they had abetter understanding of the court
process;
• 76% (22) of Clinic participants stated.that they now knew more about other resources
available to them for help and information than they knew about before;
f
• 62% (18) of Clinic participat t-s felt they had more access to legal and other resources,
• 66% (19) of Clinic participants felt-they were in g'tnore'stable'pesitioti'in their' lives;
• 59% (17) of Clinic participants feltmore empowered;
• 66% (19) of Clinic participants felt safer; and
• 48% (14) of Clinic participants felt that their lives had improved.
Since many Clinic participants appear before the Honorable Joni Hiramoto for their- restraining
order action, Judge Hiramoto completed-a judicial survey evaluating the Clinic (see attached).
Judge Hiramoto reported the following: after assistance from the Restraining Order Clinic:
• proposed Temporary Restraining brders and proposed Orders After Hearing are better
prepared:
• litigants are better informed about the types of relief to request and the limitations on
the types of relief that can be'requested;
• litigants are better able to articulate,the specific types of relief they ale;seeking;
• petitioners are better informed..about the.safety issues concerning domestic violence.and
child custody and visitation-.and the.types of custody and visitation to:request; .
• pro per litigants receive resulting restraining orders that are more consistent with the
laws and facts of their cases.- Petitioners are better able to.ask for specific types of relief
that they would not otherwise know-exist or are warranted.in their case.....
• Pro per litigants are more informed-about their ri&ts.
-
To promote ongoing coordination and regular program evaluation, BayLegat facilifated
quarterly evaluation meetings.which include appropriate representatives from BayLeQal`;' the
Court and Stand. The second quarter evaluation. meeting took place on September 19. 2000.
The third quarter evaluation meeting occurred on:March.2. 2001. The fourth quarter,evaluation.
meeting is scheduled for April 13, 2p01.
Success in Raising Additional Funds; In July 20K,.: the Contra Costa._Countv. Board of .,.
Supervisors funded their Zero Toleranc€.dor Ni estic-Violence Initiative. Upon-the Courts
request, the County awarded 1 additional funds to=the Court, .to be used in part. to .support the
Clinic. BayLegal and the Court areFcurrently wo.i}kirig tethers'to facilitate.the logistics of,this ==
funding. As critical as is the additional funding,;ihe Cojirt's-endorsement.is:equally important. .`
to the Clinic's success.
3
.. r;
II. Year End Statistics
I,�Q. ..• 2nd.Q 3 Q 4 Q� Total-__
Total Number of Clinics 0 38 35' 40 113
Total;Vumber of Petitioner's Clinics 27 23; 29 79
Total Member of Respondents Clinics 11 12 11 34 - 1
Total Number of Clinic Participants Served '(Goal=75/qtr) 1 0 66 70 81. 1 217
Participants in Petitioners Clinic 61 ` 66 ' 77 204
Participants in Respondents Clinic 6 6 4 16::'
Total Number of People Helped. 0 214 241 248 j 703
Total Number of Services Provided 0 72 78 99 249
Total Number of Referrals - 0 48 97 121 j 266`
Family Law Facilitator's Office _ 22 18 49:
Lawyers ReferralService 10 24 25.; 59
STAND (counseling/shelter) 6 9 18 "'" .3
STAND (pro:borio legal services)` .0 0 9 ` 'j 9
Legal Services for Seniors - - 2 0 0 2
International Institute for the East Bay (immigration) 3 0 2 5
Battered Women Employed(employment) 2 18 8 _ ' 28
Victim-Witness 5 20 33 58 '
Other' 11
-
Total Number of Proposed Orders Pre red 0 101 ` 107 119. 327-
.
r. -
..:.
IF:
- — -
..- .... .i}.. ..ii .::..:. .
s.:
Wiz... t - � - -- -- - - -
L:
AC
No direct services were provided in the first quarter. Program development only.
In the 2"d Quarter, one person was assisted in both the petitioners clinic and the respondents clinic. This litigant was
counted as one person served.
' In the 3rd Quarter, two people were assisted in both the petitioners clinic and the respondents clinic. These litigants were
counted as two people served.
4 See footnotes 92 and 43.
5 Total number of people helped includes children, household members or other people protected by the restraining order.
6 Total number of services provided represents the total number of services provided to all Clinic participants. Some Clinic
participants receive assistance in one contact. Others come back to the Clinic multiple times for additional assistance.
4
-x
THE LEGAL SERVICES TRUSTIOUND COMMISSION
EQUAL ACCESS FUND-PARTNERSHIP GRANTS - -
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER CLINIC---
A
LINIC---A Collaboration between Bay Area Legal Aid and --- - -
Contra Costa Superior Court - --_.-
Evaluation Report __.. .. ---.... ... .. . .
The Domestic Violence Restraining Order-Clinic ("Clinic").assists Contra Costa-_ -
County residents with limitedfinancialresources with Domestic-Violence Prevention Act. ...-
restraining order actions.
Method of Evaluation:
Pursuant to Bay Area Legal Aid's ("BavLegal") Evaluation Plan, BayLegal
evaluated the Clinic's performance- using. statistical analysis, participant satisfaction _
questionnaires and a Judicial Surveys S.
In January 2001, Bays egal mailed;participant satisfaction questionnaires to-.170
pro per litigants (both. petitioners..and respondents) that the _Clinic: assisted through
December 2000.1 Thirty-eight questionnaires were.returned to BayLegal, but only 29 of — -
those were completed. A sample participant satisfaction questionnaire is attached. - —
In March 2001, BayLegal conducted-a judicial"survey of the Honorable Joni T.
Hiramoto, because.man of he.Cynic — ici ansa a before Judge Hiramoto for - —
Y r .. Pte. p. .� pp, i
their restraining order actions. A copy of the Judicial Survey is attached..
Evaluation:
1. Which case types were most amendable to effective`self-Delp assistance; andare
there case types where self-help assistance.is not-)effectiv6
Determining the types of cases that are most amendable to effective self-help
assistance is difficult. Therefore, we will attempt to address this question in two ways;
first, through participant satisfaction questionnaires and second, by a more subjective
analysis.
First, according to the participant satisfaction questionnaires, 93% (27) of the
participants stated that the Clinic's assistance with preparing the restraining order papers
was very helpful. Ninety percent (26) of the participants stated that the Clinic's
assistance in preparing their declarations was very helpful, and 90% also found the
Clinic's explanation of how restraining orders work to be very helpful.
Second, a more subjective analysis suggests that the cases that seem to be the
most amendable to effective self-help assistance are those in which the individual is
Before mailing the participant satisfaction questionnaire, BayLegal made sure that each questionnaire
was sent to a"safe"address.
" 1
AM—
unfamiliar with the legal system, has had prior negative experience with the system- hay
limited reading and .writing skills, or due to the emotional_and physically dangerous:.
circumstances surrounding their case, needs personal assistance in completing the
necessary paperwork. For individuals who are" unfamiliar:with,. or previously :had a
negative experience with ;the legal system; the availability of.-someone to answer
questions, explain the process, address concerns and fears, and provide :personal.
interaction can have a substantial impact on their success in the restraining order process.
Additionally, for individuals who have limited reading and writing skills,.:helping. them:-
understand and prepare the restraining order papers can again greatly increase their
likelihood of successfully completing the restraining :order;..process. Finally, self-help
assistance is also very amenable to cases- involving. individuals:,who are .capable of.
preparing the necessary paperwork and understariding the legal system with assistance (as
many of the Clinic participants are), but also need community_-resource information.
The cases that are less likely to be ameddable to self-help assistance are those that
involve complex related legal issues, cases that involve substantial language barriers, and,
thosecases that involve individuals with_severe-;disabilities or_safety issues.- Though selfy
help assistance can be useful in-these cases,.it is more likely,that ongoing.representation
would be more effective. The Clinic has addressed,this issue by collaborating with other
legal and social .service agencies in the county to provide further. assistance to such
individuals.
is r
2. Which types of assistance (introductory workshops, written and video materials, =
one-on-one assistance, follow-up sessions) were. most effective in various legal
matters? - u
According to the=:returned participant. satisfaction, .questionnaires. the most;: ;Y _
effective types of assistance were one-orae-on assistance and.:`�yritten:materials an&video:
As.stated above, the"majority (90-93%)!9f responding participants stated that assistance:;
with preparing their .restraining .order; paperwork ;and declaration- as."-well :as theti
explanation of how restraining orders wgrk were very.,helpful:=AddiiionalI76%:x.(22) of::.
responding participants stated that.the.resource information relating to-domestic violence;::,
was very helpful. Twenty-one percent (6) of the responding participants did not answer
the question about resources.
3. Were pro pers more prepared after using a self-help center? Were forms more
adequately prepared and, on balance were cases less time-consuming for bench
officers and clerks after self-help assistance?
According to the Judicial Survey, the pro per litigants are more prepared after
being assisted by the Clinic. Judge Hiramoto stated that both the proposed Temporary
Restraining Orders (TROs) and Restraining Order After Hearings (ROAHs) included
more specific details about the locations and vehicles. that the Petitioners wanted
Respondents to stay away from. Judge Hiramoto also reports that Clinic-assisted pro per
petitioners were better able to articulate the legal reasons for a kick-out order and were
better informed about the types of relief ah& imitatibrns on the types of relief that can be
requested.
Additionally, according to the Judicial Survey, after receiving assistance fror the
Clinic, pro per's proposed orders.better.-addressed safety considerations. .,Petitioners
assisted by the Clinic were aware;o£ .and.-able to request. a Civil Standby;:father;than
attempting to describe that. they want police to be present when the kick-out order-vas
executed. Litigants were also better able to:conveytheir safety concerns regarding.child
custody and visitation schedules after using the Clinic:
Accordinu to the participant satisfaction questionnaire. 83% (24) of 2 the
responding participants felt.more prepared -after. receiving assistance: from.:the Clinic.
Ninety-three percent (27) .of the responding participants felt that the assistance they
received in preparing their restraining order papers was very helpful. Ninety.percent X26)
of the responding participants felt.that the assistance they received in preparing their
declaration and the explanation of how restraining orders work were very helpful.
4. Where, and for what reasons,.were litigants referred for representation or more -
complete assistance- was the referral due:to the,complexity-:of the..subject matter; : -
due to personal reasons, such as their relative skills,.language barriers, etc; or due
to other reasons?
The Clinic has made several referrals to other service providers, including, but not
limited to: STAND Against-Domestic Viblence� ("STAND"). (for counseling/shelter a.
services, pro bono legal services, domestic violence treatment program); the Family Law
Facilitator's Office; Contra Costa Bar. Assdciation's Lawyer's Referral Service; Contra
Costa Legal Services for.Seniors; International Institute of the East Bay; Battered Women.
Employed; the county's Victim-Witness Prugram;Tand other relevant;service agencies.
Please see Year-End Statistics Tor information.regarding the:-Clinic's frequent referrals:;;
BayLegal also..subcontracted with 4STAND to -provide assistance. to Spanish
speaking participants. .Under the subcontract, Spanish speaking;participants,Were given Ic, i
an appointment with a Spanish speaking service provider:;from!STAND; this assistance
was provided in a STAND office located within walking distance of..the--- Cltiuc.
Additionally, STAND was available to provide more extensive assistance to participants
with complex restraining order actions.
The Clinic also refered Clinic participants to STAND, BayLegal, the Contra
Costa County Bar Association's Lawyer Referral Service, and other legal services
agencies for representation in related legal matters that were identified while the
participant was being assisted by the Clinic. For example, if a participant indicated a
desire to obtain a dissolution, the participant could be referred to BayLegal or to
STAND's pro bono family law panel. Participants were also provided referrals for
representation or consultation on legal issues such as government benefits, housing, and
employment rights.
Further. Clinic participants were provided referrals to community service agencies
for counseling, treatment. crisis.intervention, and resources (shelter, medical needs and
other basic necessities) that were in the best interest of the Clinic participant.
5. To what extent did pro .per- litigants have reasonable expectations. before-they; = .
received pro per assis:tanee, and did expectations change as a result of the
assistance? i
The majority of Clinic participants who responded to the participant satisfaction
questionnaire stated that- they had no expectations, could not remember their
expectations, or did.not respond to the expectations question: Forty-eight percent (14) of
responding participants stated,:.that they did not have or could not _remember any
expectations about restrainina. orders or the process before -being assisted by the Clinic. :.
Thirty-one percent (9) of the participants did not answer this question. Seven percent (2)'-
of
2)"-of the responding participants stated their expectations were not changed. Thirteen
percent (4) of the participants stated that they had expectations prior to coming to the-
Clinic and that their expectations.were changed.by the;Clinic's assistance.
Of those who stated they had prior expectations that were changed because of the-
Clinic's
heClinic's assistance, oine individual stated that prior to coming to the Clinic:.,
I feared faifef lsic] due to lack of guidance and encourhgemertt: Positively" _-
(change in expectations) with thorough instructions, iiifo [sit] and>uvarrri
considerate moral support.
Another individual stated, when asked if s/he had any expectations.:.
I thought no one would give me direction or`help. --'.Yes '�e:cpecfations:, -
changed). The Clinic staff helped me to make informed decislons Ac
6. Were pro pers satisfied with the assistance they received from-the pr6ject? =. E
According to the participant satisfaction questionnaires,'. 90% (26) of the,: _ .
participants rated their overall experience with the Clinic as ekcellent: r good. Seventy
nine percent (23) of the responding participants stated they. had more information`about= _
their legal rights, and 72% (21) of the responding partici.paiits stated they.::had a better.•
understanding of the court process.
7. Were pro pers satisfied with their opportunity to make their case?
According to - the participant . satisfaction questionnaires, the majority of
responding participants were satisfied with their opportunity to make their case. Fifty-
two percent (1 5) of the responding participants stated that they were satisfied with their
opportunity to present their case in court; 34% (10) of the responding participants did not
answer this question. One responding participant stated both satisfaction and
dissatisfaction with his/her opportunity to make his/her case. Ten percent (3) of the
responding participants stated that they were not able to make their case to the court. Of
those respondents, two stated that they did not attend their hearing and one stated that
his/her response was not recognized by the judge because it was served too late.
4
8.
Were the outcomes of cases changes asy ::result of self-help.assistance?,;�
According to`tlie"Judicial Survey, the outcomes of the restraining order cases were
changed as a result of the Clinic's assistance. In her response, Judge Hiramoto stated that
the orders for enforcement were more concise because "[I]itigants. were. betterable to
articulate the specific types of relief:thev were seeking." (See attached Judicial Survey.)
Judge Hiramoto also reported that"_litigants were better able to articulate the. specific
details of the locations and vehicles:thev wanted the Respondent.to stay away from as
well as the jurisdictional reasons for, a requested kick-out order.. Thus, the orders were
more concise for enforcement after assistance from the Clinic,. Judge Hiramoto also
found that, after being assisted by the Clinic. .both pro per litigants and their proposed
orders were.better prepared.
Additionally, Judge Hiramotp, stated that,.after. assistance from- the .Clinic, pro
per's proposed orders .better reflected. their. safety considerations. . Moreover Petitioners.
were.better informed about the issues concerning child custody;_and visitation-and what
types of custody and visiiation.to request. For example, proposed Temporary Restraining
Orders (TROs) better_ reflected safety concerns +in the_. child custody and visitation
schedule, such as when andwhere the excl}ange of;the childrenvvouldt!occurpr whither .
supervised visitation was in order.
9. Did the representation of opposing parties interfere with the effectivei'0s of'g.elf-
help assistance?
i 17
Due to the fact-that the Clinic staff does not attend the.participants".restraining
order hearings, the Clinic does not have any f rst hand knowledge about how `the
effectiveness of self-help .assistance his affected when an- ppostng party is represented.
According to the..Judicial Survey, the pro per litigants that the Clinic'assists are better
..
prepared for their hearing and the outcome-of their.cases;better reflect the laws:and facts.
However, the Judicial =Survey.- does`--not describe .the impact of?oppo�ipg parties being
represented. `
10. On average, did self-represented litigants achieve results more consistent with
the law and facts in their case, after receiving self-help assistance?
According to the Judicial Survey by .the Honorable Joni T. Hiramoto, "[a]fter
assistance from the Clinic, the resulting restraining orders reflect the laws and facts.of
their cases much more than on average." (See attached Judicial Survey.) According to
the Judicial Survey, litigants are more knowledgeable about the types of relief that they
can request and what types of relief are warranted in their cases. Judge Hiramoto found
that, with assistance and information from the Clinic, pro per litigants can get appropriate
relief the first time through the process, unlike some individuals who have had to repeat
the process after the Court pointed out the inadequacies of the individual's application.
Additionally, Judge Hiramoto found that Petitioners are better informed about their rights
concerning child custody and visitation, and thus more willing to complain about
domestic violence without fear of losing their children.
11. Year End Statistics
t.st Q 2nd Q 3rd Q 4`"' Q . TAW-
Total Number of Clinics 0 3.8 35 40_ '113
Total Number of Petitioner's Clinics 27 2`3 29 79
Total Number of•Respondents Clinics 1.1 12 11 34
Total Number of Clinic Participants Served (Goal=75/Qtr). 0 66 70 81 217
Participants in Petitioners Clinic 61 66 77 204
Participants in Respondents Clinic 6-___ 6 4 16
Total Number of People Helped 0., 214 241 248 703
Total Nutnber of Services Provided 0 72 78 99 249
Total Number of Referrals 0: 48 97 121 266
Family Law Facilitator's Office 9: 22 18 -.;49
Lawyers Referral Service 10 24 25 59
STAND (counseling/shelter) 6.: 9 18 �3
STAND (pro bono legal services) 0. ..0 9 9
Legal Services for Seniors 0 0 2
International Institute for the East Bay (immigration) 3:: 0 .2 '5
Battered.Women Employed(employment) 2 18 8 28
Victim-Witness 5 20 .33 58
Other 11 4 8 23
Total Number of Proposed Orders Prepared 0 " 101 1UT7F 119 327
No direct services were provided in the first quarter. Program development only.
' In the 2nd Quarter,one person was assisted in both the petitioners clinic and the respondents clinic. This litigant was
counted as one person served.
' In the 3`d Quarter,two people were assisted in both the petitioners clinic and the respondents clinic. These litigants were
counted as two people served.
See footnotes#2 and 93.
s Total number of people helped includes children, household members or other people protected by the restraining order.
6 Total number.of services provided represents.the total number.of services provided to all Clinic participants. Some Clinic
participants receive assistance in one contact. Others come back to the Clinic multiple times for additional assistance.
1L
Restraining Order clinic
100 371°Street
Richmond,CA 94805
(510)374-3364
PROTOCOL
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER CLINIC
A Partnership between Bay Area Legal Aid-and Contra Costa Superior Court
A. Clinic Hours
• Assistance for Petitioners: Mondays/Fridays 8:00am-3:30pm.
If Tviondav is a holiday, the Clinic will-operate on the following-Tuesday. - -
Overflow: assistance offsite at BayLegal by appointment. -
• Assistance for Respondents: Thursdays 3:00pm-5:00pm - -- .-
B. Clinic— Court Procedures
1. Litigant Starts at the Clerk's Office.
• Litigants who come to the Clinic first will be directed to the Clerk's Office.
• Clerk's Office tracks total # litigants requesting RO's in Richmond.
• Clerk gives litigant Clinic Intake and.Domestic Violence forms packet.
• Clerk checks court database for prior court actions/orders pursuant to existing
Court procedures. If no prior actions/orders, clerk notes zero-hit on Intake
" If prior actions/orders clerk attaches printout to_Intake.
• Clerk escorts or directs litigant to the Clinic. _
2. Litigant Receives Clinic Assistance.
• Discuss Notice of Scope of Services form with litigant::
• Review Intake form to verify eligibility: income, domestic yiolence.criteria, . .
and existing orders.
• Explain Clinic process.
•. Assist with preparation of pleadings. Explain court process.
• Prepare proposed order(OSC&TRO).
• Review forms with litigant.
• Explain court procedures. Provide instructional materials.
• Distribute resource materials.
• Make referrals when appropriate.
• Record level of service on Intake form.
3. Litigant Takes Completed Restraining Order Papers to Clerk's Office.
• Clinic may send litigants to Clerk's Office to file up until 3:15pm.
Contact Clerk's Office if emergency and need to send later than 3:15pm.
• All applications will be reviewed and returned on same day.
4. Restraining Order Papers Reviewed by Judge
• Clerk takes applications to Judge Hiramoto for review.
• Judge Berger is backup when Judge Hiramoto is unavailable.
• Clinic staff will be available for consultation with Judge. .
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bay.-Irea L gal aid and Contra Costa Superior Court.
BavLegal subcontracts with Stand to accept reftrralsjrom the Clinic.
3/2001 l
' Restraining Order Clinic
i•.
100 37''Street
Richmond,"CA 94805
(510)374-3364..
T.
5. RestrainlhQ Order Papers Filed and Returned to Litigant.
• Clerk retrieves applications_from Judge. -
• Clerk assigns a case number, sets hearing date and location, makes copies,
files, enters info into ICMS, and forwards original documents to Martinez.
• Clerk prepares "DV Clinic Case Number and Court Date" form and puts in
Clinic mailbox in Clerk's Office.
• Restraining orders available for picklip in'the Clerk's Office.
6. Clinic Staff Prepares ROAH Forms.
• Clinic staff obtains "DV Clinic Case-Number and Court Date" form.
• Clinic staff prepares:proposed orders (ROAH) weekly and gives to Judge.
_.. :
C. BayLegal—Stand Referral Procedurt `
• Stand will make'staff available at its RichmQEftd office to aceept referrals.from the
Clinic every.Monday afternoon ftom 1:"0Dm-5 00pm.:;
• BayLegal may refer to.Stand litigants falling into the:following criteria:
r Survivor Respondents,
Monolingual.Spanish speaking or limited;English speaking litigants,
Litigants with complicated child custodylsuppoii. cases„-
Litigants also involved in juvenile dependency proceedings,
Litigants in immediate crisis, with disabilities, or would otherwise benefit from .
more on-going, in-depth services provided by Stand.
When referral is appropriate, while litigant is in the Clinic, Clinic staff.will review
intake and then schedule an appointment for litigant at the earliest time available.
• Clinic staff will call Stand and confirm appointment.
• Clinic staff will direct litigant to come to the Clinic at the designated appointment
time. When litigant comes back to the Clinic, Clinic staff will provide directions
to Stand.
D. Bay Legal Procedures —+ Data entry into Kemps
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bav Area Legal.lid and Contra Costa Superior Court.
Bai"Legai subcontracts with Stand to accept referrals from the Clinic.
3/2.001
Restraining Order Clinic
' 100 371°Stree&
Richmond,CA 94805
(510)374-3364
Clinic Forms
• Intake Questionnaire
• Notice of Scope of Services
• Sign In Sheets
Resource Information Available through the Clinic
• Procedural checklist—Applying for a Restraining Order
• Procedural checklist—Responding to a Restraining Order
• If Your Restraining Order Application was NOT Processed Today...
• Information Sheet regarding Reissuance
• DV Resources in Contra Costa Countv
• Information Sheet regarding Protective Orders
• Information Sheet regarding Service of Process
• About Your Hearing/Your Rights at Court/lvlediation
• Enforcing Your Restraining Order/Calling the Police/Listing of LEA's
.• Information Sheet regarding Notification of Prisoner.Release
• Information Sheet regarding Confidential Address Program
• Information Sheet regarding Victims of Crime Compensation Program
• Safety Planning
• CA Attorney General's Office--Domestic Violence Handbook: A Survivor's Guide
• CA Attorney General's Office--Crime Victims' Handbook
• Counseling referrals for both parties and children
• Miscellaneous Fact Sheets regarding domestic violence (i.e. Creating Safe Visitation
Schedules; Certifying Restraining Orders; Effects of Domestic Violence on Children; etc)
Other Materials used in the Clinic:
• Administrative Office of the Courts—DVRO Video Presentation for Respondents
• Administrative Office of the Courts—DVRO Handbook for Respondents
• Administrative Office of the Courts=DVRO Video Presentation for Petitioners
• Administrative Office of the Courts—DVRO Handbook for Petitioners
Referral Information: (continuously expanding)
• Stand (crisis counseling; pro bono; dv treatment program; criminal court advocacy, etc.)
• Rape Crisis Center
• Victim Witness
• Family Law Facilitator (Self-Help Center and workshops)
• Immigration resources
• Contra Costa County Lawyer's Referral Service
• Battered Women Employed--dv and employment issues (clinic times/fact sheets)
• Legal Services for Seniors/Adult Protective Services
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bav.area Legal lid and Contra Costa Superior Court.
BavLegal subcontracts wilh Stand to accept rejerralf from the Clinic.
312001 3
Reitrainiug OrderClinic-
' '100 37ih:Street
Richmond.CA.>9.4805
1510)373=3364
k _..
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING:ORDER CLINIC
Judicial Survev by the Honorable Joni.T. Hiramoto
As a Bav Area Legal Aid grant requirement. we must conduct a j. idicial survey to
evaluate the services being provided by the-Restraining' Order- Clinid ;("Clinic"). The
following are several questions aimed at evaluating the Clinic's services;.--the effect oNhe
Clinic's assistance on the judicial process and whether the..resulting restrainin, orders=are
better addressing safety and enforcement concerns.
1. Were pro Pers more prepared.after using the.Restraining:Order:Clinic?. Were .
forms more adequately prepared and, ow,balance, were, cases less..time-consumipg
for bench officers and clerks after assistance from.,the Restraining Order Clinic? :f-,.
C.
ex. completeness of forms; effect.on Court,processing time.
Yes, both proposed Temporary Restraining Orders ("TROs') and proposed
Restraining Order After Hearing ("ROAHs') are better prepared. Both the proposed
TROs and proposed ROAHs include more specific details regarding the locations and
vehicles that the Petitioner wants the Respondent to stay away from. Petitioners are
better able to articulate the jurisdictional reasons for a kick-out order. Prior to the RO
Clinic proposed TROs were commonly sent back for a lack of adequate reasons for the
kick-out order. Additionally, Petitioners are better informed about the types of visitation
to request. For example, Petitioners who come through the Restraining Order Clinic are
aware that they should not ask for reasonable visitation in domestic.violence cases.
Petitioners are better informed about the types of relief to request and the-limitations on
the types of relief that can be requested.
The Clinic has assisted Respondents with receiving information concerning their
case; including, obtaining information about the status of their case and copies of the
pleadings.when the Respondent was not served.
2. Were the orders more concise for enforcement after assistance from the Clinic?
Yes, see above. Litigants are better able to articulate the specific types of relief
that they are seeking. For example. Petitioners can request a Civil Standby, rather than
attempt to describe that. they want police to be at the apartment when the Respondent
gathers his/her belongings.
The Restraining Order Clinic.is a collaboration bene een Bat•:Irea Legal Aid and Contra Costa Superior Court.
BavLegal subcontracts with Stand to accept referrals from the Clinic.
3/2001 1
Restraining Order Clinic
100 37ih Street
Richmond,CA 94805.
(510)374-3364
3. Did the orders better reflect safety considerations (i.e. visitation schedules; civil
standby orders) after assistance from the Clinic?
Yes. Petitioners are better informed about the issues concerning child custody
and visitation and the types of custody and visitation to request. For example, the
location of'the pick up and drop off of the children; supervised visitation; and the timing
of the exchange of the children. For example, proposed TROs that come through the
Clinic include visitation .schedules that address timing concerns, such that the exchange
of the child(ren) does not occur when the other parent is present, or at the child's
daycare or school.
4. On average, did self-represented litigants achieve results.more consistent with.the
laws and facts of their case, after receiving assistance from the Clinic?
Yes, absolutely. After assistance from the Clinic, the resulting restraining orders
reflect the laws and facts of their cases much more than on average. Litigants are better
able to ask for specific types of relief that they would not otherwise know exist or are
warranted in their case. Without the Clinic's assistance some individuals are forced to
repeat the process in order to get appropriate relief, because they were not informed the
first time they filed their papers and did not know how to provide an appropriate basis
for the specific type of relief requested
Petitioners who receive assistance from the Clinic are more informed about their
rights, and thus less afraid of jeopardizing the custody and visitation of their children if
they complain about domestic violence. Petitioners feel more secure that they can seek
assistance without loosing their children.
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bav,area Legal Aid and Contra Costa Superior Court.
BavLegal subcontracts with Stand to accept referrals from the Clinic.
3/2001
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING' ORDER CLINIC
Richmond Superior Court e 11 : 1
1 •
WeNeed Your Alease Evaluate Our Services !
,
Hello.
We, at the Restraining Order Clinic, want to find out how you feel about the information
and assistance you received at the Clinic. We want to know what we do well and what we
can do better. Your feedback is very important to us.
Please take a few minutes to fill out the enclosed survev and return it to us as soon as
possible in the prepaid, addressed envelope to: Restraining Order Clinic, Bay Area Legal
Aid, P.O. Bos 2289, Richmond, CA 94802. Your feedback is completely confidential. Fill
out as much of the survey as you can — a partially filled out survey is more helpful to us
than the one we never get back at all. Please feel free to tell us how we were helpful to you
and how we can improve our services. If you have additional information you.would like to
share, you may write in blank spaces or attach a separate piece of paper.
Thank you for taking the time to evaluate us. With your feedback, we hope to improve our
services. If you have any questions about this survey, contact the Restraining Order Clinic
at (510) 374-3364.
Sincerely,.
Kim Gallegus Burns
Coordinating Attorney
The Restraining Order Clinic is a collaboration between Bay Area Legal Aid and Contra Costa Superior Court.
Program Services provided by Bay Area Legal AU.
The Clinic is approved by the Judicial Council and funded by Legal Services Trust Fund Commission,
Equal Access Fund-Partnership Grant and Modernization Grant.
DOMESTIC RESTRAINING ORDER'
EVALUATION
Thank you very mud:for taking the time to complete this evaluation of the services you received in the Restraining
Order Clinic. Your answers are confidential and will help us improve our services in the future
RESTRAINING ORDER PROCESS
Did you apply for a restraining order? Yes No
Did you respond to another person's request for a restraining order against you? Yes - No
Did you have the other party served with a copy of your papers? Yes No
Did you attend your court hearing? Yes No If no, why not?
Did the judge give you a restraining order? Yes No The other party? Yes No
Did you get temporary child custody and visitation orders? Yes No Not Applicable
What difficulties did you face in the restraining order process?
RESTRAINING ORDER CLINIC SERVICES
Please check and rate any of the following services that you received in the Clinic.
Assistance preparing restraining order papers
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Assistance preparing the declaration (statement telling my side of the story)
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Explanation of how restraining orders work
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Explanation of the court process
This assistance was: . Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Explanation of how to file the restraining order papers with the court
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Explanation of how to serve the other parry with a copy of the restraining order papers
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Explanation of how to give a copy of the restraining order papers to the local police
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful Not Applicable
Explanation of/assistance with preparing for the court
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Do you feel like you were able to present your case in court? Yes No
If no, why not?
Explanation of a"reissuance", when and how to get one(when needed)
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful Not Applicable
Resource information (fact sheets, handouts) relating to domestic violence
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Did you use any of the resource information you received? . Yes No
What other information should we provide?
Video about domestic violence and restraining orders
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful Not Applicable
Referral information about other services concerning domestic violence
This assistance was: Very Helpful Satisfactory Not Helpful
Did you use any of the referral information you were given'? Yes No
Before coming to the Clinic, did you have any expectations about restraining orders, the court process, etc?
Please explain:
Did the Clinic change your expectations? Please explain:
OVERALL EVALUATION OF RESTRAINING ORDER CLINIC
As a result of the information and assistance from the Clinic (please check as many of the following as apply):
I have more information about my legal rights
I have a better understanding of the court process
I now know more about other resources available to me for help/information than before
I feel I have more access to legal and other resources
I am in a more stable position than I was before
I feel more empowered
I feel safer
I feel that my life has improved. How?
I was NOT provided with any helpful information or assistance
Please rate your experience with the Clinic overall: EXCELLENT GOOD POOR
After receiving assistance in the Clinic did you feel: MORE PREPARED SAME LESS PREPARED
Please rate the helpfulness of Clinic staff: EXCELLENT GOOD POOR
Additional comments about Clinic staff:
Additional comments about your experience with the Clinic and the court process:
Would you have applied for or responded to the restraining order without the help of the clinic? Yes No
PRIOR EXPERIENCE WITH RESTRAINING ORDERS
Have you ever applied for or responded to a restraining order before coming to the Clinic? Yes No
If yes, was your prior attempt successful? .Yes No Why not?
If yes, did you have help with the prior restraining order? Yes No By whom?
My experience with the clinic was: Better Same Worse
After receiving information/assistance through the Clinic. I felt: More Prepared Same Less Prepared
HELPING THE CLINIC IN THE FUTURE
Would you be interested in volunteering at the Clinic? Yes - No(If yes please fill out the contact information below)
Name: Phone:( )
Address: City: Zip Code:
The Clinic may receive requests from media(newspapers, radio/tv stations) to interview people who have
received assistance through the Clinic. If you are willing to be put on our media contact list, we will call'you
when the media ask to Interview Clinic participants. WE WILL NEVER GIVE YOUR NAME OR PHONE NUMBER TO
ANYONE.INCLUDING THE MEDIA,WITHOUT TALKING TO YOU FIRST AND GETTING YOUR PERMISSION. We will not give
your information to the media unless you tell us to. Are you interested in being on our media contact list?
Yes No (If yes,please provide current contact information below)
Name: Phone:( )
Address: City: Zip Code:
Thank you for taking the time to evaluate our services. Please mail this survey as soon as possible in the enclosed
prepaid, addressed envelope to: Restraining Order Clinic, Bay Area Legal Aid, P.O. Box 2289, Richmond, CA 94802
MAY-0e-2001 11:42 WC SUPERIOR COURT 925 646 6012 P.02iO4
C' ' Poo
The Superior Court of the State of California
County of Contra Costa County W o
w
649 Main Street Ste 104 Martinez,CA 9455.3 - (510)646-1008
Date: April 30, 2001 -
To; Phil Batchelor, County Administrator .
Christina Linville
From: Garrett J. Grant, Presiding Judge
Ken Torre, Court Executive Officer
Subject: Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence - Quarterly Status Report
October-December, 2000
Richmond Domestic Violence Clinic:
Domestic Violence Conference, Brooklyn New York:
Funded by an OJP grant obtained by Stand!, a team from Contra Costa County
consisting of Judge Judith Craddick, Joe Motta and Lynn Ulkema from the District
Attorney's Office, Jim Heiser from the Probation Department and two representatives
from Stand! Attended a three-day conference in Brooklyn, New York. The conference
focused on emerging issues and policy analysis of dedicated domestic violence courts
and dockets. Speakers included judges who run the various models of DV courts from
several jurisdictions within the State of New York, as well as judges from Minnesota,
North Carolina, Florida, and individuals from the Violence Against Women office in
Washington, DC, Battered Women's Justice Project (who sponsored the conference),
National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges, and Family Violence Prevention
Fund. More than 75 persons from 11 states and Puerto Rico attended. Attendees spent
one morning observing Brooklyn Domestic Violence Court in action. The resounding
message received is that dedicated domestic violence courts, which place priority on
victim safety and access to services with strict judicial monitoring and supervision of
defendants can and do make a difference in improved accountability and compliance
rates of defendants released on bail or probation. Thus,justice is assured to both the
MAY-08-2001 11:42 WC SUPERIOR COURT 925 646 6012 P.03, 04
victim and defendant, and the message is made clear that domestic violence is a crime
which will not be tolerated by the criminal justice system. This important work cannot be
done by the Court alone, however. It is essential to have a partnership between the
Court, law enforcement, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation, victim advocates, and
social service providers so that a coordinated and effective response results. Moreover,
effective intervention in DV cases requires interagency efforts to institutionalize
processes and procedures to hold the offender accountable in a manner which will
prevent dangerous consequences and retaliation toward the victim. .
The Contra Costa County Superior Court Cross-Over Committee:
In an initial effort to address problems surrounding domestic violence CLETS orders not
being entered into the law enforcement computer system and to increase awareness of
the problems which result with conflicting restraining and other orders between the civil
(particularly family law) and criminal courts, the Criminal/Civil Cross-Over Committee was
formed with two criminal and two family law bench officers. With the cooperation of the
Sheriffs Office, a solution was found to the entry of CLETS orders, which has not been
instituted with Zero Tolerance funding, as was reported in the Court's last quarterly
report.
In discussing cross referencing cases between the various Court divisions, it was soon
discovered that there is no reasonable method by which a criminal judge would know
and/or be able to learn about existing family law orders and vice versa because the civil
and criminal computer systems do not have the capability of"talking to each other."
Presently, the only available method is for a time consuming, laborious search of the
other Court's computer system to be run if the judge hearing a case has reason to
suspect that there may be an order issued by the other division. The clerical support
position funded through Zero Tolerance allows for cross referencing only those
misdemeanants who are directed through the program.
The committee has now expanded to include juvenile and probate judges, probation,
family court services, representatives from the court's administrative offices, law
enforcement, deputy district attorneys, criminal defense bar and other agencies when
helpful to address specific issues. Recently, a primary focus has been ways to capture
accurate data, not only of cases which come within the court's purview, but also those
cases of domestic violence which never make it into either the criminal or civil court. This
is important data to have for purposes of the Domestic Violence Court and to obtain grant
funding. Thus far, more problems have been identified than solutions found. The
obvious solution is to have compatible systems between criminal, civil, family law,
probate and juvenile that are integrated and/or compatible and have the ability to "talk
with each other." Ongoing dialogue is helpful, however, to the awareness that problems
do exist.
The District Attorney's office has instructed all filing deputies to mark domestic violence
cases with red "DV" letters so that future criminal DV filings will be easily identifiable by
staff who deal with these cases files.
MAY-08-2001 11:42 WC SUPERIOR COURT 925 646 5012 P.04%04
Date Total # DV Cases #Rich TROs #Issued/ # # Other
Cal OfT "•" Cases (% DV Total) (%of total DV) Denied Reissued Dropped Proof
26-Mar-2001 23 18 (78%) 7 (39%) 7 [5 pos] 5 [3DV] 10 [MV) 1 -
19-Mar-_2001 19 16 (84%) _9_ 3 6 1 _
12-Mar-2001 _ 21 17 (81%). 9 (53%) 7 [3DV] 2 [2DV] 6 [5DV) 0 _
5-Mar-2001 24 12 (50%) 7 (58%) 8 4 10 2
26-Feb-2001 16 11 (69%) 6 (55%) 7 5 _ 4 0
20-Feb-2001 12 11. (92%) 7 (64%) 5 2 5 0
13-Feb-2001 _ 11 8 (73%) 4 3 2 2
-5-Feb-2001 24 18 (75%) 7 (39%) 11 [8DV] 4 [1 DV] 10 [9DV) 0 _
29-Jan-2001 14 11 (79%) -7 (64%) _
23-Jan-2001 10 6 (60%) -1 (17%) _ 7 1
16-Jan-2001 10 6 (60%) 1 (17%) 7 1
8-Jan-2001 18 11 (61%) 9 _ (81%)""- _-8 6 4 0
2-Jan-2001 23 17 (74%) 10 (59%) 10 4 7 2
TOTAL P.04
Probation Department Contra Steven Probation tOfficer
Victim/Witness Program Costa
,Douglas Drive. Suite 202 County
Martinez, California 94553-8500
(925) 313-4170
FAX (925) 313-4178 '`
(800)648-0600
2555 EI Portal Drive
San Pablo, California 94806-3303 .,
(510) 374-3272
FAX (510) 374-3441
(800)648-0600
DATE: April 19, 2001
TO: Christina Linville, Deputy County Administrator
FROM: oel Keller, Coordinator
SUBJECT: Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence — Second Quarterly Report
The institutional arrangements of recruiting, training and establishing operational
protocols were completed during the first quarter of the implementation of this program.
During this quarter, the Victim-Witness Program began providing direct services to
domestic violence victims whose cases were classified as misdemeanors.
Misdemeanor domestic violence victim services:
The advocate assigned to the program, Deputy Probation Officer Diana Faz, was able to
make contact with 160 domestic violence victims during this reporting period. This
included 97 children. 26 of the victims speak Spanish (Deputy Probation Officer Faz is
bilingual), two speak Farsi and one is an elder adult. 18 of the victims were qualified for
the Victim of Crime Compensation Fund and the value of their benefits is $972,000 (the
total benefit was increased from $46,000 to $70,000 for crimes that occur after January 1,
2001). If they only choose to access their mental health benefits, these victims would be
able to access $180,000 in counseling. Copies of the domestic violence victim services
reports for January, February and March are attached.
Domestic violence victim relocation:
Deputy Probation Officer Faz assisted five victims (three were family units which
included five children) to relocate and these victims received $10,012.86 to assist them
with deposits for rental housing, utilities,temporary lodging and food expenses, clothing
and personal items and other necessary expenses. Each of these domestic violence
relocations required a letter from law enforcement or a mental health provider
recommending that the relocation was necessary for the personal safety of the victim.
ZERO TOLERANCE for DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Probation Department—Initiation of Misdemeanor Probation Services
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: 1/01/01 3/31/01
1. Provide supervision services to approximately 0 89
150 misdemeanor offenders
2. Number of repeat offenses and subsequent filings 0 1
3. Number of probation violations 0 21
4. No. attending 52 program satisfactorily 0 62
5. No. with new felony conviction for DV 0 0
6. No. presented as court reviews 0 213
DISCUSSION:
1. During the first three months of operation 89 misdemeanor cases of domestic violence have been
referred to the Misdemeanor Domestic Violence Court(MDVC). We anticipate achieving our goal of
150 misdemeanor offenders under formal probation supervision by the end of May, 2001. We need to
establish a means of controlling intake immediately if we are to maintain a viable program.
2. One offender has incurred a new offense. The offense occurred prior to the first review and within days
of the original conviction.
3. 21 offenders have violated a condition of probation: 13 warrants of arrest have been issued and 8 cases
have returned to court for lesser sanctions.
4. 62 of our 89 cases are actively participating in a 52-week batterers intervention program. Of the 27
cases not enrolled 13 have absconded and bench warrants have been issued,the balance have recently
been released from jail or from substance abuse treatment or are too new to have been enrolled.
5. Fortunately no offenders have been convicted, or even arrested, on new felony DV offenses.
6. The court has reviewed 213 cases during the fust 90 days of operation.
ZERO TOLERANCE for DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Probation Department—Felony Intensive Supervision
PERFORMANCE MEASURES '(as oW 12/98 12/99 12/00* 3/01
I. Increase number of felony batters from
150 to 185 70 115 150 185
2. Increase the number of referrals for
substance abuse treatment N/A N/A N/A TBD
3. The number of probation violations (pv's)
for Felony batterers will increase initially
and decrease over time 30 60 79 TBD
4. The rate(%) of pv's will increase initially
& will decrease over time 42.8% 52.1% 52.6% TBD
* Does not include last quarter statistics from added zero tolerance caseload
Discussion
1. 5.5 positions are allocated to the intensive supervision of offenders convicted of crimes of violence
against a domestic partner. Two officers are funded by an OCJP grant, one supervises a caseload of 30
offenders and the other a caseload of 15 offenders while maintaining responsibility for the certification
of batterer intervention programs; two officers are county funded and supervise 35 offenders each; on
officer is funded by an OJP grant and supervises 35 offenders, and one additional officer is funded by
zero tolerance dollars and supervises 35 offenders.
2. New methods for collecting and tracking his data are being established. We hope to have some
baseline data available by the next reporting period.
3. Intensive supervision of dv offenders was expected to result in an increase in the number and rate of
_pv's; these violations are generally not tantamount to a new act of violence. They include such
activities as a new arrest for a substance abuse related crime, positive drug tests, failure to attend the
52-week program or report to the probation officer as directed.
4. As above.
1 Before January 1998 domestic violence cases were assigned to regular supervision caseloads and classified according to dept.
policy. In January 1998 two caseloads were designated for intensive supervision of dv offenders(70 cases).
In May 1999 one and one half caseloads were added(45 cases)as a result of the Department's success in obtaining an OCJP
(Probation Specialized Units).
February 2000 one additional caseload was added(35 cases)as a result of OR grant(Grants to Encourage Arrests).
October 2000 one additional caseload added(35 cases)as a result of Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence.
Alternatives to Violence
Educational and Support
Scott A. Flores, CDVC 1 Services
Director
ATe--V-
A Domestic Violence program E
L U
T If you are mandated to a 52-week Domestic Violence program after your C
incarceration, you can begin earning credits while here at the West County jail
E facility. Or if you feel you need help with Anger Management and/or Domestic -A
ft Violence issues. T
N Groups meet on Thursdays from 7:30 — 9:30 pm I
O
A The following areas will be covered: N
T 1. Violation of the male role belief system A
2. Abusive vs. Aggressive vs. Assertive L
3. Objectification of women
4. Drugs/Alcohol and Domestic Violence A
5. The cycle of violence N
6. Stress reduction/impulse control
7. The use of time-outs D
8. Anger management
9. The effects of Domestic Violence on children S
'r 10. Domestic Violence and the law U
This course is certified by the Contra Costa Probation office
® and is compliant with California penal code 1203.097 P
For more information : Contact your probation officer or the jail staff P
T
E
c
8-week DV curriculum for in-custody clients
Week 1.
• Definitions of abuse
Physical
Verbal
Emotional
• Cycle of violence
• Introduction to check-in structure
• Discussion of"On focus-Off focus"
• Structure and perceived violation of Male Role Belief System
Week 2
• Check in
• Domestic Violence and the law
1203.097
273.5(a)
242
243(e)(1)
245(a)(1)
245(a)(2)
236
422
646.9 (a&b)
166(4)
653m(a)
653m(b)
Week 3
• Check in
• Effects of Domestic Violence on children
PTSD
RAD
Go on to become batterers, how and why?
Go on to become victims, how and why?
Substance abusers
Video = The Hidden victims
Week 4
• Check in
• Myths around DV
• Cultural perspectives and DV
Week 5
• Drugs, Alcohol, and DV
Alcohol and the facilitation of Gamma amino butyric acid, and its effect on pre-frontal
cortex.
Cocaine and it's functioning in the Amygdala
Methamphetamines and their functioning as a sympathomimetic
Cannabinoids and desensitization
Steroids and 'Roid rage
Week 6
• Check in
• Anger Management
Scott's model
Cues and Triggers
De-escalation using pleasant imagery, deep breathing, counting backwards
"Anger is natural, Aggressive is a style, and Abuse is a choice"
Week 7
• Check in
• Communication skills
Active listening
Parroting
Summarizing
Clarifying the issue
Internalization
Use of"I"statements
• Aggressive vs. Abusive vs. Assertive
Week S
• Relapse prevention
Triggers and cues
Use of"Time-outs"
Self-care
Aftercare support
Developing a code of honor
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Initiative: Health Services Department
The Family Violence Prevention Project
PROGRESS REPORT Jan. - March 2001
Introduction
Implementation of the Health Services' Zero Tolerance effort, known as the Family Violence
Prevention Project (FVPP; see attached description), continued to proceed smoothly during the
first quarter of 2001. The FVPP is a collaboration of CW&PP, Ambulatory Care, and STAND!
Against Domestic Violence (formerly Battered Women's Alternatives). The overall goal of the
project is to: Build the capacity of Health Services programs(Contra Costa Health Plan,
Hospitals and Clinics, Public Health, Mental Health, and Substance Abuse) to address domestic
violence among clients in Health Services and contractor agency settings.
Lead responsibility for the Health Services Zero Tolerance project has been taken on by the
Public Health Division's Community Wellness& Prevention Program(CW&PP), as part of
CW&PP's existing Violence Prevention Program. STAND! Against Domestic Violence is being
compensated through a subcontract for its key role in the project. (Note:the subcontract has been
delayed due to delays in getting an overall Health Services Zero Tolerance budget to the County
Administrator's Office. These issues are currently being resolved.) The subcontract is funding
STAND! to assist with implementing domestic violence training for the Medical Residents,
participate on the Advisory Council Against Domestic Violence/Violence Prevention Coalition's
Health Systems Response Committee; and expand the bilingual capabilities of its Emergency
Response Team to provide critical intervention services on site in Health Services settings, to
non-English speaking women.
This report outlines progress made on implementing the FVPP's key objectives and tracks the
project's identified performance measures.
Return on Investment: Key FVPP Objectives
Objective 1. Convene quarterly meetings of key staff from Health Services programs to develop
an implementation plan for the Initiative and provide ongoing planning.
During this reporting period,the Health Systems Response to Domestic Violence Committee met
one time. The group heard updates about activities of the project; and discussed comments from
members about needed revisions to the Health Services Guidelines for Domestic Violence
Screening and Reporting. These revisions are currently underway, with the goal of having
revised Guidelines ready for printing and distribution by the end of June, 2001. Discussion of
how best to track Health Services referrals to STAND! was deferred until a later meeting, due to
significant internal restructuring of STAND! (see below).
Performance Measures:
Referrals: The Health Systems Response Committee continues to work closely with STAND! to
track referrals to STAND!'s Emergency Responses Team(ERT) made by Health Services
providers. Due to major internal restructuring of services at STAND!, specific ERT data is not
yet available. It is hoped that some baseline data for 2000 will be available for review by the next
reporting period..
Objective 2. Provide domestic violence information to Health Services clients through the
placement of posters and provisions of resource cards.
Recognizing the importance of creating a safe and welcoming environment in health settings for
patients impacted by domestic violence, the FVPP is continuing previously initiated efforts
within Health Services to present a consistent message to clients about the fact that domestic
violence is an appropriate topic to raise in the health setting. During this reporting period, the
posters were printed and delivered to Health Services. A system for replacing damaged posters
and putting new posters up is currently being outlined, and it is anticipated that the posters will
go up by the end of this fiscal year (June 30, 2001)
Objective 3: Train Health Services and contracting agency staff on procedures for domestic
violence screening, assessment, intervention, referral, reporting, and documentation.
Medical Resident Training
As noted in the report on the FVPP for Oct. - Dec., 2000, although the original request for Zero
Tolerance funding to support domestic violence activities within Health Services was framed
around the provision of training for medical providers,the Health Systems Response Committee
determined that additional training for medical providers should not be the project's only training
priority. However,training for Medical Residents has been designated a priority, and, to this end,
FVPP staff met with Dr. Jeff Smith, head of the Resident Training Program,to develop a plan for
training the Residents. This training will include:
Mock Patient Interviews
STAND! Against Domestic Violence staff will be trained to act as mock patients, and will be
scheduled for patient visits with residents at the Martinez Health Center. All residents will see a
mock patient, for a total of approximately 27 mock patient sessions. The mock patients will at an
appropriate time during the visit disclose that they are from STAND! and will provide individual
education and consultation to the residents about how they might have approached screening and
working with real patients who present with domestic violence issues.
Problem-Based Learning
A series of three problem-based learning sessions, three hours in length each, will focus on a
range of domestic violence issues. Three groups of residents, with nine per group,will attend
these sessions, for a total of nine sessions. Complex cases of patients dealing with domestic
violence issues will be presented for discussion during the sessions. Discussion will be followed
with didactic presentation, developed in collaboration with STAND! Against Domestic Violence,
on the provider's role in addressing domestic violence. Each session will build upon the previous
session, with topics of screening and assessment to be covered in the first session; intervention
and safety planning in the second; and documentation and reporting in the third.
Community Medicine
Each resident during this rotation is given a complex case scenario involving a fictional patient
living in the area where the resident is working. The resident is expected to identify and meet
with various community agency and county staff, to problem-solve how best to meet the needs of
her/his patient. The number of cases that involve some form of family/domestic violence will be
increased to comprise approximately 50% of the total cases. Not only will those assigned these
cases gain a better understanding of the broader context in which family violence intervention
occurs,they will share via presentations and discussions with their peers what they have learned,
thereby ensuring that all 27 residents become familiar with local resources for violence
survivors.
Mental Health Provider Training
As noted in the previous FVPP progress report,the Health Services Mental Health Division is at
a point of readiness to offer county providers and contractors(MDs, MFTs, LCSWs, and other
community mental health workers) a solid set of skills and tools for use in working with clients
affected by domestic violence. To this end, CW&PP staff worked closely with Mental Health
Division staff and outside contractors to plan the agendas for, distribute and collect registrations,
handle logistics, and coordinate two trainings for mental health providers.
The first training, entitled "Introduction to Domestic Violence Issues in Contra Costa" featured
the following objectives:
As a result of attending this training, participants will:
1. Recognize the scope and magnitude of the domestic violence problem in Contra Costa;
2. Understand the dynamics of domestic violence and the overall role of the mental health
provider in addressing the problem;
3. See their work with domestic violence survivors in the context of a countywide domestic
violence response system, which the Contra Costa"Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence"
initiative is working to strengthen;
4. Know what occurs in the Children's Protective Services(CPS) arena when cases of child
abuse that also involve domestic violence are reported to CPS;
5. Have a basic grasp of criminal and civil remedies for domestic violence, and how the District
Attorney in Contra Costa proceeds with domestic violence cases; and
6. Know what services STAND! Against Domestic Violence (formerly Battered Women's
Alternatives) offers to Contra Costa domestic violence victims and how to access these services.
i
Approximately 75 people attended the training, ranging from mental health clinicians, to CFS
workers, Probation staff, and community agency staff. While the evaluations of the session are
still being tallied, preliminary results are that the training was very well received.
The second training, entitled "Clinical Assessment and Intervention for Domestic Violence,"
focused on the following objectives:
As a result of attending the training, participants will:
1. Learn to recognize indicators of family violence in vulnerable groups.
2. Learn to ask the right questions and assess for safety when abuse is suspected.
3. Assess protocols for effective agency and collaborative community responses for perpetrators,
victims, and witnesses of family violence.
4. Know how to document and make appropriate referrals to address the spectrum of family
violence.
Approximately 90 people attended the training, which like session#1 was very well received
(evaluations are currently being tallied).
Performance Measures:
Trainings conducted: Two sessions, 3 1/2 hours in length each
Number of staff trained: Approximately 165
Participant satisfaction with training: Results currently being tallied
P
Employment and Human Services Department
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Project
2nd Quarterly Report: January 2001 through March 2001
1. BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW
This report describes domestic violence ("DV") activities from January 1, 2001 through
March 31, 2001 undertaken by the Administrative, Children and Family, Workforce and Aging
and Adult Services bureaus. Although the reporting systems necessary for collecting detailed
Domestic Violence services data are not yet in place, EHSD and its partner agencies have been
working vigorously to implement new services and develop data collection procedures for future
quarters.
11. BUREAU REPORTS
A. Administrative Services
The EHSD Contracts Unit negotiated two major domestic violence-related contracts in the
quarter. Requests for two new contracts appeared on Board agendas in February 2001:
1) STAND! Against Domestic Violence, a 14-month, $525,000 contract, using $100,000
allocated to EHSD by the CAO and carrying forward approximately$62,000 unspent in
the Antioch pilot; and
2) Elder Abuse Prevention(approximately$50,000, using general funds allocated to EHSD
by the CAO).
The contract with STAND! is in development, with the contractor expected to commence
service delivery in June 2001. The contract will establish integrated case management in West.
County, multiple domestic violence liaisons (including bilingual liaisons), specialized client
support groups, training for EHSD staff and community-based organizations, outreach and other
service components to be delivered countywide. These DV services will be available to
CalWORKs, Children and Family Services and other non-eligible residents. The contract will
t
I
Employment and Human Services Department
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Project
2nd Quarterly Report: January 2001 through March 2001
fund approximately 1 I FTE staff, which includes integrated caseload management, training,
liaisons and administrative support staff. EHSD has and will continue to assist STAND! in
recruiting staff for this and related projects. The contract will be effective through at least
February 28, 2002. A separate attachment, entitled "DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES
SUMMARY"details progress in contract implementation.
A second contract with Elder Abuse Prevention will provide.individual consultation sessions,
small- and large-group training on specialized DV topics, plus two full-day (5-6 hours)
conferences. The contract will include a determined and expansive countywide outreach
campaign. The overall contract goal will be to increase knowledge and awareness of elder abuse
issues among EHSD staff, contractors,clients, CBOs, seniors and their caregivers. Training will
be delivered across the County in diverse geographical locations.
B. Children and Family Services
Children and Family Services made a tremendous contribution this quarter to delivery of DV
services. Please see the attached reports, Employment and Human Services Department Zero
Tolerance for Domestic Violence Third Quarter Report, Project: Children and Family Services
Domestic Violence Liaison Pilot. " and the"Domestic Violence Activities Summary for
additional information.
C. Workforce Services
EHSD commenced a pilot program in 1999 in Antioch with STAND! Against Domestic
Violence (formerly BWA), which ran through December 2000. Information for this quarter can
be found in the Domestic Violence Activities Summary.
2
Employment and Human Services Department
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Project
2nd Quarterly Report: January 2001 through March 2001
D. Aging and Adult Services
As described above under Administrative Services, Aging and Adult Services plans to
implement a new contract for up to $50,000 with Elder Abuse Prevention to specifically target
elder abuse issues and community awareness. That contract has been presented to the contractor
and is in the sign-off phase.
EHSD also has several contracts for adult DV-related services, including a $5,000
agreement with Contra Costa Crisis Center(40-127) for coordinated APS emergency housing
services; a$13,000 agreement with Elder Abuse Prevention (40-122) for services to the
Multipurpose Senior Service Program and a$12,000 contract with Contra Costa Crisis Center
(40-130) for APS emergency telephone response.
III. SUMMARY
The new DV programs identified above require time for the department to implement.
Domestic violence services are complicated especially when factoring in institutionalized
differences in staff competencies, bureau operations, programs and degree of familiarity and
comfort level with DV service issues. All of these challenges have confronted Employment and
Human Services this quarter. The department has worked vigorously to coordinate across
bureaus, to interface with contractors and community members in the implementation of new
domestic violence services. Employment and Human Services seeks to raise the level of its
ability to provide DV services, while maintaining consistency in the quality of service across
bureaus and programs.
3
Employment and Human Services Department
Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence Project
2nd Quarterly Report: January 2001 through March 2001
Board approval of two DV contracts in this quarter and subsequent EIISD implementation
efforts detailed in the Domestic Violence Activities Summary should lead to new data and
additional anecdotal information in future quarters. The EHSD bureaus have collaborated to
implement new services to broaden the availability of DV services and improve follow-through
on existing DV services within Contra Costa County. Future reports should further quantify the
Department's efforts to successfully implement the Board's Zero Tolerance Initiative.
cp,E11SD contracts,3-1514
4
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
Employment and Human Services
Reporting Period: January 1, 2001 — March 31, 2001
Overview of Quarterly Accomplishments:
Some of the achievements of the Employment and Human Services Department
relative to domestic violence.services during the last quarter are listed below:
■ Established domestic violence contract implementation team, consisting of
representatives from all EHSD bureaus, including WFS (Workforce Services),
AAS (Aging and Adult Services), CFS (Children and Family Services), EHSD
Staff Development; and representatives from STAND! Against Domestic
Violence (STAND!), a nonprofit domestic violence services agency
headquartered in Concord. STAND! was selected for contracted services out of
a public bid process administered in November 2000. .
■ Developed and negotiated scope of activities for all EHSD bureaus for a
$525,000 contract with STAND! for specialized DV services through February
28, 2002.-The contract includes four key service program components: 1) .
Integrated Case Management; 2) Support Groups for CFS and WFS clients 3)
On-Site Ca1WORKs Domestic Violence Liaisons; 4) Training and technical
assistance for all EHSD Bureaus and selected community based organizations
(CBOs).
■ Identified protocols and began to adopt procedures for implementing services,
including referral, verification, documentation and data collection.
■ EHSD Staff Development established a working relationship with STAND! to
coordinate planning and implementation of WFS, AAS and CFS training.
■ Conducted research on existing curricula, identifying curriculum development
needs, in collaboration with STAND! to ensure training relevance and
consistency with threshold competencies for each bureau.
■ Conducted outreach and identified potential trainers with relevant expertise to
meet the diverse training needs of WFS, AAS and CFS.
I 05/01/2001
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
Employment and Human Services
Reporting Period: January 1, 2001 — March 31, 2001
■ Defined who will be trained in each bureau, training session structure and
specific bureau training needs.
■ Established threshold competencies to guide training for WFS staff.
■ Assisted with initial planning and implementation of WFS DV-Liaison-related
activities.
■ Defined scope of work for Bay Legal technical assistance to STAND! on
curriculum development, capacity building for trainers, protocols and
procedures for WFS.
■ Linked STAND! with Elder Abuse Prevention, a nonprofit agency under
separate contract with the department, to coordinate respective training efforts
with AAS.
■ Established agreement that DV Liaisons will provide technical assistance to
WFS staff to assist with developing capacity to integrate appropriate responses
to domestic violence into their functions.
■ STAND'S East County Case Manager from the pilot project began to transition
functions to DV liaison role as reflected in the number of case consultations
completed this quarter (see below).
• Dealt with numerous STAND! staffing changes throughout program
development, contract negotiation and implementation. STAND! experienced
changes in directorship of Employment and Training and other key positions.
STAND! recruited a permanent department director who commenced work on
April 1, 2001.
■ Distributed job descriptions for DV Liaisons, WFS.manager and ICM
caseworkers. Jobs have.been advertised on the department website (please visit
www.ehsd.org), local newspapers,job bulletins and employment websites.
■ Distributed description of WFS DV Liaison project, timeline for
implementation and space and equipment needs to West and Central County
2 05/01/2001
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
Employment and Human Services
Reporting Period: January 1, 2001 — March 31, 2001
WFS Managers. Established contacts in EHSD district offices in Central and
West County for implementation. East County Services were piloted last year.
■ Facilitated development of STAND! internal procedures for implementing a
pilot of Integrated Case Management (ICM) in West County, which will
provide intensive services and follow-up for approximately 40 EHSD clients.
■ Reviewed internal STAND! needs for capacity building to ensure delivery of
appropriate services for EHSD clients.
■ Reviewed and revised anticipated outcomes for clients receiving ICM.
■ Commenced identification of challenges and opportunities in implementing
ICM. Some of the challenges include follow-up with clients who no longer
have active cases with EHSD, developing referral and verification processes
and navigating differing requirements of CaIWORKs, the Child Welfare and
Adult Protective Services systems.
■ Clarified scope of services for ongoing support groups that will be made
available to CFS & WFS clients in May or June 2001.
■ Began negotiations on scope of activities related to case management and
follow-up with perpetrators requested by CFS.
■ Neared completion of an evaluation plan for all activities related to this project,
including identification of data collection needs and methods.
■ Posted position openings on the EHSD website and performed other staff
recruitment efforts.
Challenges and Barriers
• Delays in project start-up due to contract negotiation and staffing.
• Staff recruitment continues to be a challenge. STAND! has been unsuccessful
in recruiting WFS DV liaisons and manager for implementation in West and
3 05/0 112001
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
Employment and Human Services
Reporting Period: January 1, 2001 — March 31, 2001
Central County and has not yet hired a caseworker for the ICM pilot in West
County.
• The STAND! Clinical Department Director left on medical leave, requiring the
identification of other permanent and temporary STAND staff to assume
responsibility for implementing support groups and case management and
follow-up with perpetrators.
• STAND requested cross-bureau (CFS, AAS and WFS) implementation to the
extent feasible to promote consistency and coordination. Ongoing
implementation team activities have been difficult because of scheduling
demands and conflicts.
• Obtaining bureau agreement to explore coordination and consistency has been
cumbersome, raised concerns for STAND! about increased demand for staff
availability to work independently with each bureau. STAND is also
concerned that developing discreet procedures for each bureau may not best
meet the diverse needs of EHSD clients.
Activities and Deliverables
Program Activities
1. Training
No training has been delivered to date, but training efforts through a
separate contract with Los Medanos College are nearly complete. Training
models for all bureau staff are in the development phase.
Outcomes:
Anticipated outcomes are in development. Threshold competencies have
been established for WFS staff. Threshold competencies for AAS and CFS
staff are still needed. Learning objectives for each training will reflect
threshold competencies for each audience.
2. Co-located Cal WORKS DV.Liaisons
Based on the evaluation and lessons learned during the Antioch pilot
project, STAND! began to shift the role of the case manager in East County
4 05/01/2001
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
Employment and Human Services
Reporting Period: January 1, 2001 — March 31, 2001
to performing DV liaison functions, which focuses on providing technical
assistance to build WFS staff capacity. Greater emphasis has been placed on
promoting opportunities to provide case consultation to WFS staff.
Highlights of East County activities include:
■ Consultation to WFS staff on 18 occasions during this period.
Consultation ranged from clarifying WFS procedures to providing
technical assistance on writing a plan or linking clients to services.
■ Referral of 56 clients to STAND! staff by WFS staff. Upon follow-up,
STAND! successfully contacted 27 clients, assessing their needs and
conducting safety planning. STAND was unable to contact 29 of the
clients referred, despite multiple attempts.
Outreach:
■ STAND conducted 15 presentations to 77 participants at job clubs, 2 of
which were done in Spanish. 9 presentations were done in the Richmond
WFS office, 6 in the Antioch office.
3. Support Groups
Groups have not started yet. However, after needs assessment activities are
complete, groups will be scheduled as soon as practicable.
Outcomes:
Outcomes for support groups designed to meet the needs of CFS and WFS
clients are in development.
4. ICM— West County Pilot
Integrated Case.Management has not commenced and awaits hiring of staff,
completion of needs assessment and development of policies and
procedures with CFS, AAS and WFS. Anticipated service start date is June
192001.
Outcomes:
Outcomes for clients receiving Integrated Case Management are in final
development.
5 05/0112001
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTIVITIES SUMMARY
Employment and Human Services
Reporting Period: January 1, 2001 — March 31, 2001
S. Evaluatiofz
The evaluation plan for all project activities is near completion.
Development of data collection methods for both County systems and
within STAND! are in the planning stage.
6 05/01/2001
� H
Cd
P"
Kn U 0 �+� N 0Ccn
O N cid
N H A O O O A -0
u v 'H' � cq
o i s � � -o .c�
U + U
in 0
O — TJ .Q fl1 U .t0 t3.. cn .,w.� En �� f3. ti O > ° H C 'o �n 4a Cd a•+
O v
Cd i:d
�y W •O G� '.F4" O y O > U N N O vQi
fc' o o
Cd '° o m 3 .� o o 0 3 5
0 En in
a ° {' °° �cs a o cd o u `" o ami au.
L" g A o 16
� s v a0, c0 bo +1 .., cid C1^Cd 0 `� � > � 0 c°
W ►--+ .Q U cd v°i o• ;- o >. o "� 41 O v O >
U cu U ami .., a) ri. °' .c a a� ay > a� v' p a>
.r�+ >-+ ." N y +^��+ ted `+ r10' N^ G: �Cd G � .0 + QCT
cd En cd
t � vi cd v� a-� t G.
p t.+ y :=� U cant°!�+ 4
Cd
w -Cdo v �
cV2
�} ,c
W o a>
041
� Ed0 o
to cd
J'' " Cd N A A o
cd
v '45. a a �
o o a3
H N N V W
W � V
P-+ on o �,
L� U x
a, o
►� 'do �✓ °
ra 3 0 �
N
a
o .o.
ObD� 0 > U W
V V cdU oU o Q
U
.O
cd
N � N •y � /� Nom.• cd ~ � p
c O� V 0 EA
W V �
v�
cd ¢. 8 A O19 -0 0
tn
U 9
tn
N v N c 7, 'L3 cu a tz,
cd td, 'd U w OBD cH 65 q V- N 1 �S. �d No� o N °
r4 CI.
O
m cn p chi y :d °, T r °Q+ o ; a U
V' N U O ai �d N t� oD ci bD p r ,, +
aN� 'd ,, wO ccs
N U cd t. ^O O
00 0 0 In
Ao ° cd � �a ,� i %z o�
O G O
{4 +' 0
ted ui•� O y U. N
° aAi c ,p ca
cn
tC N y N N 7 ;-t� ° y v� oD of V
cyCd o
w
ted Q' cd YO O v y +-- cd 43
ODtx
N o�
bA v " N
cd o w H o a 3 w"� N o p °�' o OD
cn
y 7 U ,.. y a y cd ^ O y �? Oy�D vs4N c�
N O y " NCd
On a>
Ow
° 04En '�
N W a0.
W00 .� � 4
c^
A r' o y
Cd
H P►1
ON > �
V/
Cd
1 v
V V °' w ono rA
o Oo �vs Cd o `a °
wl —
d onV. 0 ,� o c o N Cd
;fl
„/ r a>
�j O U W
NN ° N 4. N
- a
.r
Cd
N
Q. c O
c�3 Q W '0
icd
O VCD
crs0 o
ctsb $- o
CA 42EA
O oy
on> v tn b°
o A o a c`D•� .� � � -
.
'o n u �o ? o
ao C, W `�
o
.cd tn
a� y y p y cd
.. y.
Oo
wl w p
0 cd Cd 0
� Q c ate ' o �
a0i o 'Oe�q zi •5 w0
o
4 O 4cod En
+ •U+ M
r� a�
.s: .tz W v G cdv p,
VCl)
olc)
U O
oA
� �
V
V ti
ai 4z., � � o
to A O V U CL +1 U '0
v . 44 o
o Q.•msV
� ��, �' a �
o � aio .y
a0i o Cd ° +'
+� d M c0,v 8 .0 A ig ami
C
r �cd Ocd
.. 0
Cd
V O t!2 O 3 "00 ✓✓ � � V
eo A .a t,'} o. . ca o 0
roan h3 „° �' oa. A
0
o x Cd -45
v 0.4 o P•
a `� mi 0 T A o
OR
e A .- U Q b •o
cts r4
d �' •�" {. •� y N fes+ '7 "i ' + �' N
w o o � � o W o �, ° r-� www
wo C7 ' r U U V
� j N C
m
Subject: Zero Tolerance for Domestic Violence -
Quarterly Status Report to the Board of Supervisors
From: Case Management Division of Aging and Adult Services, EHSD, submitted by
Bette Wilgus, Staff Assistant II
Goals/Outcomes:
Expand capacity of ability to serve elders and dependent adults who are victims or at risk
of being victims of domestic violence
Procedures:
1) Professional & Community Education forums
2) Integrated Case Management with STAND! Against Domestic Violence
Report Summary
Contra Costa County EHSD has contracted with STAND! and Elder Abuse Prevention in
order to achieve program outcomes. The contract with STAND! provides for six trainings
for EHSD staff. The purpose of the trainings will be to increase staff competency of
domestic violence issues. STAND! will also be responsible for developing integrated
case management procedures to be utilized by Adult Protective Services(APS) Children
and Family Services(CFS) and Work Force Services(WFS).
The contract with Elder Abuse Prevention provides for twelve workshops,three single
topic trainings and two full day conferences in West and East/Central County for county
staff, community agencies, senior adults and caregivers. For details regarding the service
plans from both STAND! and Elder Abuse Prevention please refer to attachments at the
end of this report.
Coordination of the training sessions and procedures for an integrated case management
model will be overseen by a committee whose members include representatives from In
Home Support Services, Medi-Cal/Food Stamps Unit. Aging and Adult Services. The
committee will provide a forum for communication between STAND!, Elder Abuse
Prevention and EHS to discuss the systematic issues that may come up as the Zero
Tolerance for Domestic Violence program is implemented. The types of issues that may
arise include:
• Data collection systems
• Implementation and trouble shooting on protocols-and procedures
• Assistance identifying contacts and developing commitment to this project
• Technical expertise
• Review of on-going assessments and input on revisions to meet desired outcomes
Additionally Adult Protective Services(APS) will provide training for STAND!
regarding elder abuse issues. APS has already begun such a program in conjunction with
the District Attorney's office for all county law enforcement departments. Education
programs are also regularly presented by APS to police academy cadets. At the present
time a similar training is being developed by APS for POST a state certified police
officer standards and training program. A sample packet of training materials is enclosed.
Challenges
Maintaining confidentiality with an integrated case management system will depend on
an agreed Release of Information format to be used by participating services. Each of
these entities has stand-alone confidentiality policies and procedures. These policies
differ according to the regulatory mandates under which each service operates. A
common ground will need to be found under which each service can maintain the
integrity of their confidentiality requirements. Current plans include scheduling meetings
with service representatives to share and compare existing forms from which to create a
standardized form to be utilized when sharing cases.
Base Line Data
Attachments
STAND! Service Plan
Component I. Training and Technical Assistance
This component addresses EHS Department's capacity to effectively intervene in cases
where domestic violence is a factor. This will be achieved via training and access to
liaisons in obtaining the following threshold competencies.
• EHS staff will be able to identify clients experiencing domestic violence (DV)
• EHS staff will possess knowledge and skills related to issues of DV to effectively
integrate into plans.
• EHS staff will understand the challenges and barriers faced by survivors of DV and
its impact on successful completion of their plans
• EHS staff will address safety issues during office and home visits for both clients and
workers
• EHS staff will have knowledge of department policies, procedures and protocols
related to DV, including how to document and transfer safety issues to new workers
as cases are transferred.
• EHS staff will have knowledge of STAND! and community DV resources and how to
advocate, link, and maintain the connection to client and service providers.
The trainings STAND! will provide for EHS and Community base organizations(CBO)
staff will range from basic DV to advanced DV. These trainings will prepare EHS and
CBO staff to perform with the above mentioned threshold competencies and begin to
integrate building the capacity to address DV into their systems. The trainings will-be
designed to meet the identified needs of each system. Identified needs thus far include
basic DV training for new staff, advanced training for staff who have received prior
training and training which includes clinical implications. The advanced training will
include topics such as implications for staff working with clients experiencing DV and
interviewing techniques designed to encourage disclosure.
Component II. Integrated Case Management
By meeting and collaborating with participating EHSD divisions STAND!_will:
• Establish procedures to communicate about shared clients, coordination of services,
sharing information and providing follow up services.
• Create a dual-purpose referral and confidential release of information form
• Clarify what information will be shared between STAND! case managers and EHS
staff
• Clarify service outcomes
Elder Abuse Prevention Service Plan
The educational programs will address issues related to elder abuse. Each of the
educational forums outlined below will include securing a site, materials development,
outreach, arrangements for Continuing Education Units when appropriate, assistance with
transportation arrangements for seniors and dependent adults, handouts,
speaker/presentation, set-up and clean-up. Measurement tools will be developed and
implemented.
County staff, seniors and dependent adults will not be charged a fee. Publicity will
indicate that the Board of Supervisors sponsors senior fees, Zero Tolerance for Domestic
Violence. Professionals other than county staff may be charged a nominal fee, plus an
additional fee for CEUs when these are offered.
Educational Forums:
• 12 Workshops—2.5 hours each; maximum 50 attendees
A set of three distinct workshops will be provided in four locations throughout
Contra-Costa County(East, West, Central & South). These workshops will be
offered to county staff, staff of community agencies. Subject matter will cover
defining and recognizing various types of elder abuse, eligibility criteria for APS
referrals mandated reporting requirements, accessing resources. A light snack and
beverages will be served.
• 3 Single Topic Trainings — 2.5 hours each; maximum 75 attendees
These trainings will be provided specifically for county staff and community
professionals. Each will focus on highly pertinent and current subjects such as
self-neglect or undue influence. A light snack and beverages will be served.
• 2 Conferences— 5-6 hours each; maximum 200 attendees
These full day conference will be geared for seniors and dependent adults.
Conference will take place in Cent and West County. Their purpose will be to
raise participants' awareness of DV among attendees, recognition of signs of
possible abuse, accessing needed resources and peer supports. A light breakfast,
beverages and lunch will be served.
w
U o
J
00
U o -
M
a
r
0
0
0
0
N
I-
L
U a�
c�
J �
J Q w
LLI
V) J
d Q
-
Q fA Q D N
U
W
Z otS ..
li 'o >?
J (D
N zo
C �
O qQ
V =
LU
0
z
o
� w
� w
M
= o
J N
Q
w
2
o
(J?
4
` Z M
t- N
7
Q 4CIO
� otS O
y
a Na-
W cs= y
4 Z N,
ZO Zr
oN
Q NZ)
W
U M
Qy.. J _
r: Q
=
Cf) w Q o
N
LLI
m 0
Q V -
O
H d � 'a
0.
W
a 0 w
W �
J �
0
Z' ei W rn
O Z N
U o
o F-
0 o Z
m W
Q z g �
OM z �
< v O
J \ Z N
OM Q
m
_ Q
w
Q �
U
J r
Uo
�t
to
o
oo
UCD
U
� V
m 0
Q V
UJ
co0
LU
Z Q N
1
W Q
O Z_
U) r� ,
� w
Q n
Q L
Lu N
Z = o
0 .-0
_j M
J
Q
w
� 2
Z
J
Q
y � �
b
o �-
CA
� � 1
o s
.� a U I W
o
a
y
02 o 7
bo
H �
a
o � o �
b g
y y,41
N ti a
.�
w �.»
40. W
E 04
z
U caU
hi h W
zQ U
r
r.a '
w
' s
n o
i4-
;,c tD d �.{
°
co cc
CO
ICU tie �. .
O° G .
t co C4 O
° o . O to
to
to
"t3 Z3. psi
CD '+ r• � O rr tp tD 1�
19
H
ty Ks a co
oto G• � "'•
cr
d -O
C
0
0
ai
60 � ..
i
42 c
o
a 0
G o
W
k-W w o o
0 � � g
� o
h «0
ac N
N
L40.
.3
3 3 •L7
c.0
a c O
U U
H W
N -
w •
c�
CD
r• co t co D a
Q, 0 a coo c?o
•' 'O 7C' tv
O tlQ O Oma` co
"`G N O ter►
O
•.c ca Gwt
a
o -it o
w w C', 9
07 0 .°��'
rA ti G N
N
go 0
W �
d
0
�G (✓D
G