1

ORANGE COUNTY SACPA/PC1210

Three-Year ReportSandy Hilger, Research Division , OC Probation

Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division, OC ProbationAlaka Nafday and Curt Condon Quality Management, OC HCA

Mary Hale, Division Manager, OC HCA-ADAS

COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE AGENCY

ORANGE COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT

2

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

SACPA applies to 3 categories of defendants: New Offenders, Probationers, and Parolees.

Applies to anyone convicted of a non-violent drug possession offense on or after 7-1-01.

Applies to anyone on probation for a non-violent drug possession offense or on after 7-1-01, who violates that probation by getting arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense.

Parolees who are on parole on 7-1-01 who violate parole by getting arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense.

3

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

A non-violent drug possession offense is:

1. unlawful possession, or

2. use, or

3. “transportation for personal use”

of any substance listed on California’s five controlled substance schedules.

PC1210 (a)

NVDP also applies to being under the influence of any controlled substance in violation of H&S 11550.

4

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

The term “Non-Violent Drug Possession Offense” The term “Non-Violent Drug Possession Offense” does not include:does not include:1 1. Possession for sale or2 2. Production or3 3. Manufacture of any Controlled Substance

5

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

Defendants are ineligible for SACPA if previously convicted of 1 or more serious or violent felonies (strikes), and if within the last 5 years they:

1 a. were in prison, or

2 b. were convicted of a felony other than a non- violent drug possession offense, or

3 b. were convicted of a misdemeanor involving physical injury or the threat of physical injury to another person.

6

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

Defendants are ineligible if while using a firearm they either possess or were under the influence of Cocaine, Heroine, Methamphetamine, or PCP.

Defendant is ineligible if he/she refused drug treatment as a condition of probation.

Defendant is ineligible if convicted in the same proceeding of a misdemeanor or felony unrelated to the use of drugs.

7

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

If the defendant qualifies and accepts drug treatment under SACPA, sentencing will include:1 1. mandatory probation3 2. mandatory participation in a licensed or

certified treatment program (maximum 12 months with 6 months of aftercare)

Sentencing will not include incarceration as a condition of probation

8

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

SACPA splits probation violations into 2 categories,

drug related and non-drug related: On Non-drug related violations, the court may revoke

probation. On the first and second drug related violations, rather

than revoking probation, the court may intensify treatment.

On the third drug-related violation, or if the defendant is found to present a threat to community safety, then the court may revoke probation.

9

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

The defendant may petition for dismissal of the charges at any time after the completing drug treatment.

Unlike Drug Court, if the defendant is successful at the hearing, the court shall dismiss the indictment and the arrest shall be deemed “to have never occurred.”

10

Legal IssuesLegal Issues

In order to grant a dismissal, the court must find: the defendant has substantially complied with the

conditions of probation, and the defendant has completed a prescribed course of

drug treatment, and that as a result of that treatment there is “reasonable

cause” to believe the defendant “will not abuse controlled substances in the future”.

11

Background

PC1210/SACPA became effective on July 1, 2001.

Primary intent: to provide drug treatment rather than incarceration to eligible non-violent adult drug offenders

Goals: preserve jail and prison cells for serious and

violent offenders enhance public safety by reducing drug-

related crimes improve public health by reducing drug

abuse

12

BackgroundBackground

The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act has had a dramatic affect on County resources.

In terms of the Orange County Probation Department alone:

Over 11,000 offenders had entered probation on PC1210 by July 2004

By July 2004, 45% of adults on probation were past or current participants in PC1210

13

Evaluating the results

We examined the results, three years after implementation, for 3863 offenders who agreed to participate in SACPA during the first year (July 2001 - June 2002).

14

QuestioQuestions:ns: 1. What is the status of the 3863 participants three years later?

2. How well, or poorly, did the offenders move through the system? Where did offenders fall out of the system?

3. Did SACPA probationers present a threat to the community? (criminal history background and recidivism while on Probation)

4. Were SACPA probationers amenable to probation and treatment services. Did they show progress in terms of rehabilitation and improvement of life competencies?

15

Where are they three years later?

Statuses of first-year PC1210 individuals as of July 2004(N = 3863)

Other1% (N = 36)

Conditional/relief of supervision7% (258)

Out on w arrant19% (741)

On PC1210 probation

14% (557)

On regular probation17% (656)

Termination category unknow n

7% (N = 268)

Sentenced to state prison

16% (N = 622)

Had cases successfully

dismissed19% (N = 725)

16

Where did we lose them?

17

Offense profile of PC1210 probationers

Initial sustained offense:

PC1210Offenders

General AdultProbationers

Offense Level:72% were felonies

Offense Level:90% were felonies

Offense type:2% person3% property92% drug

Offense type:22% person15% property55% drug

18

Violations during term of probation

Probationers who entered Probation due to a PC1210 offense had fewer new law violations than the average adult probationer. 24% had one or more new law violations

versus 31% of non-PC1210 probationers.

Among the terminating SACPA probationers from the first year group, 54% of new law violations were misdemeanors 85% of new law violations were drug-related

19

Do PC1210 offenders respond to services?

Probation assessments of risk and need factors at probation entry and exit indicated improvements in almost all areas.

Areas of significant improvement included:

* drug addiction, and alcohol addiction,

* vocational ability, employment,

* companions, and physical health,

* overall risk of recidivism

* overall needs score

20

Treatment completion rates:

The treatment completion rate for the first group (24%) was the same as the average for SACPA participants across the State.

In comparison to the State, OC “lost” more offenders before entering treatment, but kept more offenders once they entered treatment.

21

In summary: The majority of those who fell out of SACPA

continued to be held accountable within the criminal justice system.

All SACPA probationers showed significant gains in competency except for those who terminated from Probation and went to prison.

22

Did we meet the SACPA goals? Rate of incarceration for California in comparison

to the national rate: Rate of Incarceration

350

400

450

500

Nu

mb

er In

carc

erat

ed p

er 1

00,0

00

National Rate California Rate

Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bulletins “Prisoners in 1994” through “Prisoners in 2003”, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/p03.pdf

23

Did we meet the SACPA goals? Preserving jail and prison beds

The rate of prison incarceration for low level drug offenses: (CDC Data)

OrangeCounty

Average acrossCA counties

2001 658(.23 per 1000population)

144.8(.20 per 1000population)

2002 515(.18 per 1000population)

111(.17 per 1000population)

Garrick Percival, UC Riverside, based on CDC data.

24

Did we meet the SACPA goals? Reducing Drug Related Crime

76% of year-one participants had no new law violations while on Probation.

Needs/Risk assessment scores from start to finish of Probation showed a significant reduction in risk of recidivism as well as a significant reduction in drug abuse

25

Did we meet the SACPA goals? Improving public health - first year group

59% (2259) enrolled in treatment

24% (924) completed treatment (approximately 200 of these completed residential)

Probation NIC assessments indicated asignificant improvement in drug addiction,vocational ability, employment,companions, and physical health

26

HCA Modifications after the first year

Treatment assessments were conducted by providers rather than HCA (2003 to present)

Increased flexibility is given to providers to augment treatment with additional services (2003 to the present)

Intensification of Outpatient I and II (2003 to the present)

Funding cuts forced the reduction of the highest level of outpatient treatment and of residential treatment in 2003

Increase in residential treatment (2004 to present)

27

HCA Modifications after the first year Co-location of HCA assessment staff with

Probation staff. More intensive probation supervision of

higher risk cases made possible by: Creation of field monitored (banked) caseloads for

lower risk cases (2003) Elimination of most new misdemeanor cases from

formal probation (9/1/2004) Petitioning the court for relief of supervision

immediately upon completion of treatment

Increased supervision activities as evidenced by over 264% increase in the number of home-

calls and searches.

28

Future Plans Identify and implement preventative measures to reduce

the number of individuals who go out to warrant. Work more closely with local law enforcement to address

the issue of individuals once they go out to warrant. Focus upon the issue of improving employment rates for

SACPA probationers. Conduct workload time study of PC1210 units in order to

ensure the most efficient and effective use of Probation resources.

29

Sources of Information Goals of SACPA: Official SACPA web-site at:

http://www.adp.cahwnet.gov/SACPA/prop36.shtml UCLA state evaluation: “Evaluation of the Substance Abuse and

Crime Prevention Act, 2003 Report”, Doug Longshore, et. al. UCLA

Incarceration Rates for Drug Offenses: “The Influence of Local Contextual Characteristics on the Implementation of a Statewide Voter Initiative…, Percival, Garrick, Policy Studies Journal; 2004, Vol. 32 Issue 4, p589. (UC Riverside) (Data shared during communications with the author).

Treatment Information: Orange County Probation PC1210 Shared Database System.

Violation Data while on Probation: Orange County probation department NIC Risk/Needs Assessment database and Case Management System database.

30

Sources of Information

Successful Case Dismissals: Orange County Probation Case Management System data verified with Orange County Public Defender data.

Prison Incarcerations of First-Year PC1210 Participants: Orange County NIC Risk/Needs data verified against case information from the Orange County District Attorney Office and Superior Court.

Improvements in Probationers’ Competency Levels: Orange County NIC Risk/Needs assessment data as entered by the deputy probation officers.

Offense Rates while on Probation: Orange County Probation Business Plan 2003.

Criminal History Profiles and Offenses while on Probation: Data from Orange County Probation Case Management System and NIC Risk/Needs Databases.

31

Contacts Orange County Probation Department:

•Mack Jenkins, Director Adult Court Services Division (714)-569-2222•Sandy Hilger, Research Analyst, Research Division (714) 569-2055

Orange County Health Care Agency:•Mary Hale, Mary Hale, Division Manager, OC HCA-ADAS (714) 667-3968•Alaka Nafday, Quality Management, OC HCA (714) 834-7653