HomeMy WebLinkAboutS Manager - Criminal Justice Partnership Program Grant Application CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Community-Based Corrections Plan
COVER SHEET
.,N
(Please Print or Type) _ . g'
County or Multi-
,_
County reran ge_rn;.tham� ?
Board
Chairperson/Position Miicec"rarev rhair range-rhatharb—f
Criminal Tnctir•e Part-- ;n.Prnaram� Ad Rnar�
=g x =
v ' 3 ' to
AV
/ --
3
By:
Moses Carey, Chair, Orange a ty Uva Holland, Chair, Chatham County
Board of Commissioners Board of Com ussioners
County Contact
h
Person Charrnn CiIPr�ManaolPnt An �ct
j '}
County FEIN
County Contact Person's Address & Telephone Number
Orange C-mint Man a r'c Office -
P. O. Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278
(919) 732-8181 ext. 2300
Plan Submission Date Fehmaq 14 1915
4
CRMNAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGP_A2M--NC DEPARTZME'N7 OF CORRECTION
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE ONE OF SECTION A- -LOCAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT
(See reverse for detailed instructions)
1. Highlight your local advisory board's discussion of local sentencing policy for targtargeting ZD
offenders in the structured sentencing grid in your jurisdiction.
a) Describe any cell-by-cell analysis of the sentencing grid completed to date by
your local advisory board.
b) What plans does your board have to continue to encourage cell-by-cell decision
making at the local level.
c) In broad terms, Est your comprehensive plan's goals and objectives as they relate
to the sentencing grid,. In other words, what goals does you local advisory board
have to gricourage the formulation of local policies to enhance the working of the
sentencing grid?
12-19-94 CRP Annual Plan Final Draft For use in fim round—plan and application due 2115/95
1
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE ONE OF SECTION A - - LOCAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT
(See reverse for detailed instructions.)
1. Highlight your local advisory board's discussion of local sentencing policy for
targeting offenders in the structured sentencing grid in your jurisdiction.
a) Describe any cell-by-cell analysis of the sentencing grid completed to date
by your local advisory board.
b) What plans does your board have to continue to encourage cell-by-cell
decision making at the local level.
c) In broad terms, list your comprehensive plan's goals and objectives as they
relate to the sentencing grid. In other words, what goals does you local
advisory board have to encourage the formulation of local policies to
enhance the working of the sentencing grid?
The Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board used both an
experiential and analytical approach for targeting offenders. In the experiential method, the
nominal group process was used to draw upon the everyday experiences of the board
membership to identify characteristics of offenders. This approach allowed the group to
engage in a substantive discussion around the question — "What are the causes of crime and
recidivism in the community?"
The group generated a list of 26 elements that they believed to cause crime and
recidivism. The top 5 elements, in priority order, as identified by the advisory board were:
(1) Substance Abuse
(2) Poverty
(3) Lack of Job Opportunity
(4) Alienation/Lack of Community Support
(5) Lack of Educational Opportunity
These elements were germane to the programs upon which the advisory board finally decided
to develop and implement.
The advisory board also used an analytical approach to targeting offenders using
extensive data collection to guide the formulation of distinct profiles of offenders to be served
by programs/services in the criminal justice continuum. Part of the data analysis included a
cell by cell analysis of the total number of felony sentencing episodes for Orange and
Chatham Counties for FY 92-93 (see Table I) and the number of felony sentencing episodes
in FY 92-93 which would have received community or intermediate sanctions, under
structured sentencing (see Table II). This data was supplied by the State Criminal Justice
Partnership Research Staff.
2
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
There were a total of 305 felony sentencing episodes during FY 92-93 in Orange and
Chatham Counties. Only a small number (19 or 6%) of convicted felons in Orange and
Chatham Counties were convicted of high level crimes in classes A through D (i.e. murder,
rape and armed robbery). 286 or 94% of convicted felons were sentenced in Categories E
through 1, where under structured sentencing, intermediate or community sanctions may now
be imposed. Of the offenses where intermediate or community sanctions will now occur,
there were 203 convicted felons in FY 92-93 who under structured sentencing, most likely
would receive an intermediate or community sanction. Of those, 185 or 91% occurred in
categories H and I on the grid (i.e. larceny, forgery). In reviewing the number of convicted
felons in categories H and I, we find the highest saturation of persons in the lowest prior
record levels of I and 11. 164 or 89% of convicted felons in categories H and I had prior
conviction levels of I or H. This seems to indicate that the largest number of convicted
felons who would likely be sentenced to intermediate or community sanctions under
structured sentencing, will include property criminals with histories of few or no prior
convictions. Further analysis follows.
In category E, persons with prior conviction levels of I and 11 may be sentenced to
intermediate or community sanctions. Of the category E convicted felons in FY 92-93 from
Orange and Chatham Counties who might be sentenced locally, 5 fell in prior conviction level
I and 3 fell in prior conviction level H. A total of 8 or 4% of convicted felons in FY 92-93
in this category might be sentenced to intermediate or community sanctions.
In category F, persons with prior conviction levels I through HI may be sentenced
locally to intermediate or community sanctions. Of the category F convicted felons in FY 92-
93 from Orange and Chatham Counties who might be sentenced locally, 4 were in prior
conviction level 1, 1 in level H and 1 in level III. A total of 6 or 3% of convicted felons in
FY 92-93 in this category might be sentenced to intermediate or community sanctions.
In category G, persons with prior conviction levels I through IV may be sentenced
locally to intermediate or community sanctions. Of category G convicted felons in FY 92-93
from Orange and Chatham Counties who might be sentenced locally, 3 had prior conviction
level L I had level IL and none for prior conviction levels III and IV. There was a total of 4
or 2% of convicted felons in FY 92-93 in Orange and Chatham Counties who might be
sentenced to intermediate or community sanctions in this category.
In category H, persons with prior convictions levels I through V may be sentenced
locally to intermediate or community sanctions. Of category H convicted felons in FY 92-93
from Orange and Chatham counties who might be sentenced locally, 59 bad prior conviction
level L 61 level ][[, 7 level 111, 4 level IV and 1 level V. 'Mere was a total of 132 or 65% of
convicted felons in FY 92-93 in Orange and Chatham counties who might be sentenced to
intermediate or community sanctions.
3
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
In category 1, persons with prior conviction levels I through VI may be sentenced
locally to intermediate or community sanctions. Of category I convicted felons in FY 92-93
from Orange and Chatham counties who might be sentenced locally, 22 had prior conviction
level 1, 22 level 111, 8 level M, 1 level IV and none in levels V and VI. A total of 53 or 26%
of convicted felons in FY 92-93 in Orange and Chatham counties who might be sentenced to
intermediate or community sanctions were in this category.
There were 59 persons in category H with prior conviction level 1, 22 persons in
Category I with a prior conviction level I and 22 in category I with a prior conviction level
H. This total of 103 or 51% of convicted felons in FY 92-93 may receive a community
sanction based on the grid. Therefore, the remaining 100 or 49% of convicted felons in FY
92-93 in the various categories would be sentenced to intermediate sanctions under structured
sentencing according to the grid.
Since much of the above analysis was based on projections of the numbers of persons
who may be sentenced to community and intermediate sanctions based on FY 92-93 felony
prison admissions, the Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board will
continue to analyze cells in the grid vs. data from the actual experience with structured
sentencing.
A broad goal of this comprehensive plan is to reduce prison admissions due to
substance abuse, with objectives of gaining reductions in probation revocations and reductions
in new criminal offenses. The advisory board will encourage development of local policies as
appropriate to achieve its goals and objectives and enhance the working of the sentencing
grid.
4
TOTAL NUMBER OF FELONY SENTENCING EPISODES IN FY 92-93 TABLE I
ORANGE-CHATHAM COUNTIES
FELONY OFFENSE CLASS BY PRIOR RECORD
PRIOR RECORD LEVEL
I II
Ill IV V VI
0 Pty 1-4 Pts' S.g Fts: -14 Pts 15=1$Pts I9+Pts
A Death or Life Without Parole
3 A A A A A A TOTALS
srsis':
0 0 0 0 a 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0
82 A A A A A A
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 1 1
C A A A A A A
?i' i`"<si >i:':`; . : s .ii'
::.:.:::: ::I :................:............. ............ .............. ... :: ::...
2 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 a 0 2 3
D s A A A A A A
0 2 a 4 0 1 0 I a 1 0 a 0 9
1; <; I/A Ul A A A A
2 4 1 4 1 0 a a a a I 0 5 $
F I/A I/A A A A A
W
2 3 I 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 $
W
0 G C/I I I/A I/A I/A A
3 3 4 0 0 1 3 3 0 2 0 0 10 9
H.,. C/I I I/A I/A I/A A
;........ ...:::::•;:.::.
:::•::
::::,:;::s<::;::
12 47 16 45 5 23 7 19 0 5 2 3 42 142
C C/I I I/A I/A I/A
L .... . ...... .... .... ...
f 11 11 11 1 7 5 0 1 1 0 0 29 30
turn[
.:: :::..
33 72 33 1 66 7 34 16 26 1 2 9 3 3 94 1 210
NOTE: A=Active unis ment� I=Intermediate Punishment; C=Comm umty is ent; = at am; 0--Orange
1. A sentencing episode is one offender convicted in a sin le court in one day
2. Any columns or rows in the sentencing grid which contain only zeros are not printed.
3. The numbers in the cells are actual county data for FY 92-93. They may be used,with the proper caution,to plan
for FY 94-95.
4. These sentencing episodes reflect all convictions; active,intermediate,or community.
. ...........
..........
. . .......... .........
.........
..........
..........
.........
............ .....
........ .... .... ..........
.... ... ...........
........ ........
..........
....... . ..... ..........
.... .... ...
......... ....
......... .....
........ ....
.........
...................
.........
Qn
O
o
ZI-I zU
0
.. ........
... .........
... . .. ....A W U W a O U s w F O a w F A
PQ
9 x W a .. ............
...... .... ... .....
14
RION
..!�R
a:a
1.7
c 46
.Sic
iv
r,6
wa
HIS
.......... :j:j
F, F--- F
.........................
6
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE TWO OF SECTION A - - LOCAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT
(See reverse for detailed instructions.)
2. Describe any changes in local policies that have already occurred as a result of the
comprehensive community-based corrections plan.
a) Explain any agreements made by different officials in the criminal justice
system in order to meet the objectives of the comprehensive local plan. This
should explain how the agreements will be carried out, and by whom.
b) Explain how the plan accounts for and incorporates existing community-based
programs.
c) Describe any potential policy changes or discussions brought about by the
Board's data analysis.
d) Was there participation from all board members appointed to the local advisory
board? If not, how did the lack of participation of certain segments of the
local criminal justice system affect the board's ability to engage in policy
discussions?
While there have been no changes in local policies as a result of the comprehensive
community-based corrections plan as yet, the Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership
Advisory Board did identify some policy opportunities that will be explored further as the
board continues to meet. During the advisory board's review of the local criminal justice
system, the following issues were noted:
(a) Citations are used generally for motor vehicle offenses only and are issued by the
State Highway Patrol. Neither Sheriffs Department uses citations since they do not
normally enforce motor vehicle laws. Citations are also used rarely by the Chapel Hill
Police Department. The statutes permit the use of citations for misdemeanors and a
policy change could be implemented to develop a specific policy for the use of
citations in minor offenses. This could have an impact on jail census.
(b) There is no structure in place for bond reviews for misdemeanants who are unable
to make bail. nose found in this circumstance, remain in jail until their court date,
which is usually a month from the date of admission to jail. This contributes to jail
crowding, particularly in Orange County. A bond review process could be developed
separately from the proposed pre-trial program outlined in the plan. This might
impact on jail census.
(c) Deferred prosecution is being used on a discretionary basis by the District
Attorney's office, but there is no specific program or criteria at present. Statutes allow
for a defendant to be placed on deferred prosecution if charged with a Class H or I
felony or misdemeanor and he/she has not previously been placed on probation.
Development of a specific program would enhance the criminal justice continuum.
7
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
(d) House arrest with electronic monitoring is available as a condition of supervised
probation. Individuals must pay to be on this program and it is not used beyond 60
days. Of note, there is underutilization of the program. A review of policies may
produce full utilization of the program.
(e) Many persons who remain in jail are unable to make median bonds of $500. A
formal process for bond review for persons remaining in jail and a review of bond
policies could be addressed separately from the pre-trail program proposed in the plan.
(f) Federal prisoners occupy space that might be used for local detainees. The
Orange County Jail averages 18-27 federal inmates monthly. While a policy change
relative to the number of federal inmates to be housed in the jail could impact
overcrowding, it was felt that a change would be unlikely due to contractual
obligations and the revenue stream stemming from housing federal inmates.
The Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board carefully examined
all aspects of the local criminal justice continuum. The pre-trial and substance abuse services
proposed, were specifically designed as enhancements to the current system to ease their
incorporation. Having representation from all elements of the criminal justice system on the
advisory board was another means to insure the plan's acceptance.
Throughout the course of the planning process, there was active participation from the
Orange and Chatham County Commissioners, County Managers, Department of Probation,
Alternative Sentencing, Mental Health Center, Sheriffs Departments, Public Defender's Office
and the Joint Orange-Chatham Community Action Agency (JOCCA). A local attorney, the
Administrative Office of the Courts and the Chapel Hill Police Department were also active
participants.
Other participants included the judges, the Community Services Work Program and the
District Attorney's Office. The inconsistent involvement of the judges and District Attorney's
Office deprived the Advisory Board of their valuable input in targeting the offender groups to
be served and assuring their total support for the plan. However, there will be continuing
opportunities for all segments of the justice system to maintain involvement in the more detail
development and implementation phases of the plan.
8
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE ONE OF SECTION B- -PROGRAM DESIGNAND IMPLEMENTATION
1. Describe in detail the following:
a) Need for the proposed community-based corrections program; how the advisory
board decided the program was needed;
b) The problem statement;
c) The target offender population, including specific data about the target
population;
d) How the program will address the problem, and;
e) The services the program will provide.
The Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board, following
lengthy deliberation and data analysis, decided to propose two programs -- one designed
for a pre-trial population and the other for persons who might be sentenced to
intermediate sanctions and found by assessment to suffer from alcohol and/or drug
addiction. Two issues dominated the discussions from the beginning of the planning
process. The issues were that the Orange County jail is overcrowded and that substance
abuse is a contributing factor to crime in both counties..
The problems associated with the development of the pre-trial program were:
(a) Pre-trial detainees comprise 83-89% of the jail population in Orange and
Chatham counties and contribute to overcrowding.
(b) The Orange County jail population exceeds the facility's rated capacity
(capacity is 71 and average population is 94).
(c) Many inmates remain in jail on bonds of less than $1000 with data
indicating the median bond for persons in jail is $500.
(d) There is no formal mechanism for misdemeanants to receive a bond
review.
The advisory board decided to contract with a private, non-profit agency to
provide a Pre-Trial Release Program. The purpose of such a program is to expedite pre-
trial release of certain low-moderate risk offenders prior to trial; thereby relieving jail
crowding and enhancing the management of that limited resource. Ten counties in
North Carolina have existing programs including Durham, Wake, Forsyth and
Mecklenburg counties. This program would target offenders who meet the following
characteristics:
(a) is a misdemeanant or felon of low to moderate risk to the community,
(b) is unable to make secured bond,
9
(c) has family/community ties,
(d) has a viable residence,
(e) has no pattern of previous failures to appear in court,
(f) has medical problems beyond the capacity of the jail to manage,
(g) has had no pre-trial bond review.
Currently, the Jail Administrator reviews the census daily. Based on the length of
stay and crime type, jail personnel make efforts to get offenders before a judge for a
bond review to help relieve jail crowding. This is an informal process. The proposed
Pre-Trial Release Program will be a formal process that entails the following service
components:
(a) Coordination of the development and dissemination of a pre-trial release
policy in conjunction with the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge and
the Chief District Court Judge.
(b) Pre-trial assessments (interviews) will be conducted on all detainees in the
Orange and Chatham jails within 24-72 hours.
(c) Assessment information will be verified and a prior records check
conducted.
(d) Detainees will be matched to the characteristics of the target population to
determine eligibility for pre-trial release and/or supervision.
(e) Pre-Trial Release Program personnel will coordinate court appearances for
possible detainee release with jail and court personnel.
(f) Pre-trial assessment data is shared with the judge at detainee's court
appearance for possible release.
(g) Supervision and monitoring is provided to offenders released pre-trial until
they go to trial.
(h) Offenders are contacted and reminded of court dates by program staff.
(i) Pre-Trial Release Program staff will evaluate the program's operations and
make quarterly reports to the Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice
Partnership Advisory Board.
The Pre-Trial Release Program will be made available within the jails and courts
through coordination with jail administrators, judges, court clerks, etc. Any pre-trial
offender confined in the jail is potentially eligible for the program. It is anticipated that
the program would greatly enhance efficiency in the utilization of limited jail resources
and judges will have much better information on which to base bond decisions, provided
that all parts of the pre-trial justice system embrace this program.
10
The second program is to contract with a private, non-profit or for-profit agency
or a county funded agency to provide a comprehensive substance abuse program for
persons sentenced to intermediate sanctions. The problems leading to the proposed
program:
(a) Current research findings indicate that many criminal offenders are
substance abusers. Data collected by the Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice
Advisory Board which profiled prison admissions for each jurisdiction
found the following: 32% of felons and 1% of misdemeanants admitted to
prison from Orange County in FY 93-94 were confined due to drug
offenses and 32% of felons admitted to prison from Chatham County
during the same period were confined due to drug offenses. Self reports
by prisoners from Orange County during FY 93-94 indicate frequent
alcohol use by 30% of felons and 33% of misdemeanants and frequent
drug use by 35% of felons. Self reports by prisoners from Chatham
County during the same period indicate frequent alcohol use by 29% of
felons and 46% of misdemeanants, though none admitted,to frequent drug
use.
(b) The percentage of probation revocations due to drug/alcohol use is rising
gradually. In Chatham County, 2% of probations were revocations due to
alcohol/drug use in 1993, a 1% increase from 1991. In Orange County, 4%
of revocations related to alcohol/drug use, a 1% increase since 1991.
(c) Anecdotal information from probation supervisors *indicates that as much
as 60% of their caseloads have substance abuse problems.
(d) There is no coordination of existing referrals and services to this
population.
(e) There is no specific substance abuse program designed to meet the needs
of addicted offenders.
(f) While an array of substance abuse services already exist, particularly in
Orange County, they have limited capacity and would have difficulty
accommodating this targeted population.
The offenders targeted for services under this program would have the following
characteristics:
(a) Felony offenders or misdemeanants who are on intensive/high risk
probation, including those who have violated probation.
11
b Felon offenders with prior conviction levels II to VI and misdemeanants
( ) Y P
with prior conviction levels II and III sentenced to intensive, high risk
probation and found by assessment to have substance abuse problems.
Currently, detoxification and regular outpatient and intensive outpatient services
are available, but have limited capacity to absorb this population as previously indicated.
Further, the services are not designed for this population. There are halfway houses
throughout the state that provide residential services to this population. There is no
residential facility in Orange or Chatham County. Inpatient services are provided to this
population by the state program in Butner. It has limited capacity and is often at
maximum capacity. A therapeutic community program in Durham is providing long-term
residential services to this population and will accept residents from Orange and
Chatham Counties. However, this program is new and needs support to maintain its
viability. The proposed program would meet the problems identified through the
following service components:
(a) Assessment/Case-Management (to the extent the service is not provided by
the newly proposed Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC)
Program for Orange and Chatham Counties). To provide clinical
evaluation to determine presence of addiction and coordinate and monitor
the offenders interactions with the substance abuse treatment system.
(b) Stepdown levels of care from intensive outpatient to regular outpatient to
continuing care group treatment for up to 12 months. To provide a group
program of treatment from intense structure to minimal structure based on
needs of the offender with required treatment involvement up to 12
months.
(c) Individual Counseling - One-to-One Counseling to address issues unique to
the individual offender will be available.
(d) Family Involvement - Family members will be engaged in the treatment of
the offender so that family dynamics are supportive to the rehabilitation of
the offender.
(e) Detoxification Support - Medical and non-medical withdrawal from
substances will be provided using existing resources and contracted services
as appropriate.
(f) Residential Support will provide structured living and treatment
environment using existing and contracted services as appropriate to assist
offenders who lack a positive support system.
(g) Educational Support - will use existing resources or contracted services to
assist offenders who have educational deficits.
12
(h) Vocational Support -will use existing and/or contracted services to provide skill
building and job placement services.
(i) Inpatient Support -will provide intensive medical detoxification and treatment
services through existing or contracted services.
(j) Self-Help Group Support -Mandatory participation in Narcotics Anonymous and
Alcoholics Anonymous. Families will be urged to become involved in Nar-Anon
and Al-Anon.
(k) Urine Testing-Random urine screens will be obtained on all program participants
through contractual arrangement with a NIDA certified laboratory.
(1) Coordination with the Criminal Justice System to insure compliance.
(m) Monitoring and Evaluation of program effectiveness with Quarterly Reports to the
Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board.
The program would be accessed through the proposed TASC program or probation
officers would contact the service provider to arrange for a substance abuse assessment.
Decisions relative to service level would be based on the following diagram as it appeared in the
"Intermediate Sanctions Handbook":
LEVELS OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT
TREATMENT INTENSITY
AND
CRINMAL RISK LEVEL (lst sevwa
Therapeutic Community
Intensive Residential Treatment
Intensive outpatient Therapy
Weekly outpatient Therapy
Education and thug Testing
No Treatment (No Problem)
If an offender is accepted into the program, probation officers would facilitate
modification of judgement as appropriate to include the treatment program and urine drug testing.
The program provider would maintain regular contact with probation officers to report progress
and any non-compliance. There would be enhancement of the criminal justice continuum through
this program and better utilization of limited prison space.
13
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE TWO OF SECTION B- -PROGRAM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
2. Describe the goals and objectives of the proposed community-based corrections
program. Describe their relationship to the four goals of the CJPP as enumerated in the
State-Local Partnership Act of 1993 and to the goals developed by the CJPP (see
reverse).
The Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board established the
following goals and objectives for its proposed programs:
Pre-Trial Release Progr, am
Goal: To maintain jail populations at or below rated capacity.
Objectives: (a) a pre-trial release policy will be drafted by the Senior Resident
Superior Court Judge and the Chief District Court Judge by June
30, 1995.
(b) 90% of released pre-trial offenders will appear in court as scheduled
by June 30, 1996.
(c) The jail populations will not exceed rated capacity by June 30, 1996.
Substance Abuse Services
Goal: To reduce the number of prison admissions due to substance abuse.
Objectives: (a) To provide substance abuse services to 65 persons on intensive/high
risk probation who are assessed to be chemically dependent by June
30, 1996.
(b) To provide substance abuse treatment alternatives to 100% of all
offenders accepted into the program by June 30, 1996.
(c) 50% of offenders assessed as chemically dependent will successfully
complete treatment by June 30, 1996.
(d) 50% of offenders receiving treatment will maintain abstinence by
June 30, 1996.
14
(e) There will be a substantial reduction-in the number of revocations
among intensive/high risk probationers by June 30, 1996.
(f) There will be a reduction in the number of new criminal offenses
committed by intensive/high risk probationers by June 30, 1996.
The community-based corrections programs proposed by the Orange-Chatham
Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board directly relate to the goals of the State-
Local Partnership Act of 1993 and the goals developed by the Criminal Justice
Partnership Program. The proposed programs are designed to reduce recidivism, reduce
probation revocations, reduce substance abuse among offenders and reduce the cost of
incarceration at the local and state levels. The proposed programs also support the new
sentencing structure, provides punishment and rehabilitation, and promotes coordination
among county and state agencies.
15
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE THREE OF SECTION B- -PROGRAM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
3. Describe program operations, including a) an outline of the approach, b)
implementation steps of the program and offender participation requirements, c)
administrative structure and staffing pattern, d) staff training, e) financing, f) degree of
community involvement, and g) plans for continuing care and follow-up upon completion
of the program.
Pre-Trial Release Program
As previously noted, it is the intent of the Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice
Partnership Advisory Board to contract with a private, non-profit agency to develop,
implement, administer, coordinate, monitor and evaluate this program. The first step is
to develop a request for proposals and hire a contractor to develop and implement the
program. Part of the development phase would be to get a pre-trial release policy
established within the jurisdiction.
The program would be accessed by offenders from the county jails. A screener
would interview each offender confined in jail within 24-72 hours of admission. The
screener would verify information obtained and conduct a background records check.
The screener and administrator would coordinate with jail personnel, court personnel
and judges to have eligible offenders presented in District Court for review and/or
release. The screener will be present in court with the offender and report the outcome
of their assessment to the judge as requested. The judge will then determine whether or
not an offender is released, and if released, any conditions of the release. If a condition
of release is that the Pre-Trial Release Program supervise an offender until the trial
date, the administrator and screener would provide this supervision, maintaining regular
contact to ensure that conditions of release are being followed and reminding the
offender of the scheduled court date. On the court date, the screener or administrator
verifies that the offender appeared as scheduled and met/did not meet other conditions
of release. Once an offender goes to trial, the Pre-Trial Program's responsibility ends.
Persons who violate the conditions of pre-trial release, will be reported to the court and
likely will be returned to jail.
It is envisioned that this program will require a part-time program administrator
and a full-time screener. Any hiring or training of staff would fall within the purview of
the contracting agency. The contracting agency would be required to develop an
evaluation mechanism and make at least quarterly reports to the advisory board outlining
progress on agreed upon goals and objectives. The advisory board will provide progress
reports to the Boards of Commissioners and make an annual report to the State
Criminal Justice Partnership Program. The program will be funded solely by Partnership
funds.
16
Substance Abuse Program
The Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board plans to
contract with an existing county agency (the OPC Mental Health Center) or with a
private for-profit/ private non-profit agency to develop, implement, administer,
coordinate, monitor and evaluate this program. A request for proposals will be
developed and a contractor hired to plan the program. The programmatic approach is
eclectic in nature, drawing upon a menu of options or service alternatives to which an
offender could be referred based on individualized needs. Inclusive in the options would
be the use of existing programs/services for which there would be no cost (i.e. self-help
group involvement) and/or the payment of fees for services needed in the rehabilitation
of offenders.
The Department of Probation would refer targeted offenders to the proposed
TASC Program or directly to the contracted service provider for an assessment by a case
manager. Based on the outcome of the assessment, the case manager would then refer
the offender to the appropriate level(s) of care to meet the individualized needs
identified. The case manager may make no treatment referral based on the absence of a
problem or the presence of criminality and substance abuse impairment that is not likely
to be significantly impacted by the provision of additional services. The case manager
would be responsible for monitoring the offender's involvement in all aspects of the
service delivery system for up to 12 months, reporting compliance/non-compliance to the
Department of Probation at regular intervals. Offenders will likely begin intensive levels
of service and transition to continuing care where they may be served as long as
appropriate.
The service provider would make the determination as to whether to expend
funds for needed services within the guidance provided by the advisory board. Those
services for which expenditures may be necessary are intensive outpatient services,
detoxification, inpatient treatment, residential services, vocational services, transportation
and urine testing. It is also envisioned that one full-time and one part-time case
manager would be needed for this program, with staffing and training falling in the
purview of the service provider. The service provider must develop a monitoring and
evaluation system. The program provider would make at least quarterly reports to the
Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board as to progress on goals
and objectives. Program progress will be shared with the Boards of Commissioners at
regular intervals and reported to the State Criminal Justice Partnership Program
annually. Partnership funds will be the only financial resource for the provision of this
program.
17
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE FOUR OF SECTION B- -PROGRAM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
4. Describe program monitoring criteria and data collection methods. Describe
proposed methods for evaluating short-term program impact. Describe all
documentation and records that will be kept (for the entire program, including
monitoring and evaluation).
The contractors for the Pre-Trial Release and Substance Abuse Program will be
required to develop a monitoring and evaluation mechanism for the respective programs
to include necessary documentation and records. Data collection and program
monitoring criteria should directly relate to the goals and objectives established by the
advisory board and may consist of, but not be limited to, the following:
Pre-Trial Release Program -
• # of offenders confined in jails
• # of offenders screened
• # of offenders released pre-trial
• # of offenders supervised as a condition of release
• # of offenders who appear on scheduled court date
Substance Abuse Program
• # of offenders referred
• # and % of referrals assessed as chemically dependent
• # and % of referrals offered treatment alternatives
• # and % of offenders successfully completing treatment
• # and % of offenders remaining abstinent
• # and % of offenders with no new criminal offenses
• # and % of revocations
The contractors will be required to make at least quarterly reports to the advisory board
for the duration of the program and/or contract.
18
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
PAGE FIVE OF SECTION B- -PROGRAM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
5. Provide the name, address and phone number of any designated contractor who
will be providing the proposed program or services. (Not known at this time).
5a. If a multi-county plan, provide the name, address and phone number of the fiscal
agent to coordinate financial activities pertaining to the implementation funding grant
award.
Kenneth Chavious, Finance Director
Orange County Government
P. O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
(919) 732-8181 ext. 2451
Fax: 644-3009
19
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
SECITON C--DATA FORM
Provide a flowchart of the local criminal justice system(s). Also provide a description of
the system in narrative form. This flow chart and narrative must be provided regardless
of the format used for reporting other data.
When an offense is committed a law enforcement officer may intervene or a
civilian may report the incident directly to the magistrate. If a law enforcement officer is
involved, he/she may choose no intervention, refer the individual to a community service
or issue a citation. There is no data to determine the frequency with which these actions
are taken in Orange and Chatham Counties, except as it relates to citations. Available
data indicates that citations are rarely issued except in the case of motor vehicle offenses.
In these two counties, law enforcement officers generally take offenders into custody and
the offender is taken to the magistrate's office. The magistrate's response to a civilian
complaint or law enforcement officer is to issue no warrant, refer the offender to a
community service, issue a summons or release the offender on personal recognizance or
bail/bond. There is no third party supervision or pre-trial release program offered
through the magistrate's office in Orange and Chatham Counties. An offender may also
be taken into custody and placed in jail from the magistrate's office.
An offender who is charged with a felony is scheduled for a "first appearance"
hearing within 72 hours of being charged. At "first appearance", an offender charged
with a felony may be released on personal recognizance or bail/bond or tried and
released. If the offender is unable to make bond or is not otherwise released, he/she
remains in jail. If an offender charged with a felony is bound over for trial, then pre-
trial motions are held. At the pre-trial motion stage, an offender charged with a felony
may remain free on personal recognizance or bond and if not released, he/she remains in
jail. Probable cause hearings are held next for an offender charged with a felony. At
the probable cause hearing, no probable cause may be found and the offender is
released. If probable cause is found, the offender remains free on personal recognizance
or bond and if he /she is unable to be released, the offender remains in jail. An offender
charged with a felony is taken before the Grand Jury following a probable cause hearing.
The Grand Jury may return no true bill of indictment and the offender is released. If a
true bill of indictment is returned, the offender remains free on personal recognizance or
bond and if he/she is unable to be released they remain in jail. After the Grand Jury
proceedings, an arraignment is held, after which an offender continues free on bond or
personal recognizance or is confined to jail. Following arraignment, pre-trial motions are
again held, with the offender being free or jailed until trial. At trial, an offender may be
found not guilty or the case is dismissed. The offender may also be given a non-jail
sentence or receive an active jail sentence. The offender may appeal a sentence,
remaining free on bond or personal recognizance or confined to jail until the appeal is
heard. The sentence may be overturned on appeal or the sentence is upheld and the
offender serves the sentence. Upon completion of the sentence, the offender is released.
20
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECT_IONS PLAN
SECTION G-DATA FORM
Offenders charged with misdemeanors remain in jail if not released on personal
recognizance or bond. All offenders charged with misdemeanors in Orange and
Chatham Counties are given a court date for pre-trial motions that is 30 days from the
date of the offense. This is done primarily to accommodate law enforcement officers
and insures that the officer will be working on the date the case goes to court. At the
pre-trial motion stage, an offender charged with a misdemeanor may be freed on
personal recognizance or bond or may remain in jail until trial. At trial, an offender
charged with a misdemeanor may be found not guilty or have the charges dismissed.
The offender may also be found guilty and given a non-jail sentence or an active jail
sentence. The offender charged with a misdemeanor may appeal a sentence and remain
free on personal recognizance or bond or be confined in jail until the appeal is heard.
On appeal, the sentence may be overturned and the offender released. If the sentence is
upheld, the offender serves the sentence. Upon completion of the sentence, the offender
is released.
Available data indicates that there were 2,438 convictions in Orange County in
1993. During the same year, only 1% of the cases had jury trials. In Chatham County,
there were 1,034 convictions in 1993. During the same year, 3% of the cases had jury
trials.
o U m < 21
< J y U W
<W 01
�~ C
ZAco
N O
I
N v
'
W
z�
OC W Oe p C C Ct
i <
F L N
i _ A A m L
i. us I L C
N, 2 J .`•N
<
! W
_; 2 1— OC O
W S
O W : r•• < � 0 Y
O; N X W O L
j 2 cc S
•, �i' J as
Fo-]
y_ 1— L. E
2M;
u
F-r � :�': w m►- ai
d d
U- 1 u 1 A M. C'
" r I
I m
An. C m o
W
! W p Q L L
O I = I m i m 7 "4 O
a r I I mHae ammO�
O 7 < O _
U 1 C ( C< W cc •+
V r 1 1 aUx n'7 N O u U U
Ar� N I I m y A O < c B-3 " 1
W z U =--a a
ul CL
���"�W•i yyyy y 1- t 1 i I r I w Y m H d C I 1 I i r ...w y I
W S N I,1 y
I' m
LU
7
S `v �'all
2 c� ,
> O o 1w C
11= "
0
C m
I U t I p O = S E "y 0 "
I d I N J El V aC 0
C �+
W J t.7 C U m C "O
t c i = W LU C
4 <
N .µ N Oe C
I H I MI U UA W` z r z rc cm
t u i y z. :.�` J cc O
i 1 w�.w� I ya<e w s:Y oe i— WOn< 7 0�^ 4, v
1 U 1 yT.y.www �W ri W Nm / — p
x^w W .v..v �� < W J ope O L Y
CL
I C 1 I < w< x C .+� u
ad m r- c. a
1 > 1 A c
if
J <
1 -- — g
Fs 9
N
1 1 I ii O a < ❑
_ _ z
1 v I i A A A K Z i
us
I = I I
i 1I
er
"
I o 0
1 S oe .<- oe w
I U w .U.. ..... U W
W W
. . . . . . . . . . .
O 1L W 2 N W
22
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
COUNTY COMMUNITY-BASED CORRECTIONS PLAN
SECTION C--DATA FORM
This form is intended to be a guide for minimum data collection (other than flow chart). Collecting data
for three years is a suggestion, not a requirement. This form is not intended to preclude the collection
and presentation of other relevant data. You may report the data using this form or you may use another
format of your choice, provided that you include all required information specified in the Partnership Act
as clarified in the Annual Plan.
PART A. County Population Data
1. Fill in the county population from most recent census.
1990
2. Fill in the corrected county population for the indicated years.
1991 1992 1993
PART B. Arrests
List the number and rate of arrest in the county per year,
Number Rate per 1,000 residents
1991
1992
1993
PART C. Courts
1. Indicate below which judicial district the county belongs to, the number of judges and
the number of court sessions (days per week) for District Court and the number of
weeks per session for Superior Court..
Judicial District -15-B
District Court Superior Court
Number of Judges
Number of sessions 5 days per week 9 nyg weeks per session (Orange)
days per week Jug weeks per session (Chatham)
12-19-94 CJPP Annual Plan Final Draft For use in fust round—plan and application due
2/15/95
23
This report was compiled to assist Orange and Chatham Counties in meeting data collection
requirements of the Criminal Justice Partnership Act. A large portion of this data was supplied
to the consultant through Partnership Staff. Data that was not supplied by Partnership Staff was
collected by the consultant at the jails of each county. More specific methodologies regarding
the data was noted where appropriate. The objective of this report was to present the data as
fairly and objectively as possible. In doing this, committee members will be able to use their
knowledge and experience with their local justice system to target specific offender populations
under the Criminal Justice Partnership Act,
ORANGE COUNTY
POPULATION
This data was provided by Partnership Staff and shows a steady increase in Orange County's
population from 1991-93 (see Table la). For 1991, the population was reported as 96,307. In
1992, the population increased by over 3,000 to 99,790. The population continued to increase in
1993 and was reported as 101,970. This continued increase is significant because there appears
to be no indication that the population will level off or decrease due to the continued growth of
the Research Triangle area. This should be a concern to those involved in criminal justice
decision making primarily because an increase in population usually indicates an increase in the
number of crimes committed.
Table la
ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION
calendar year(cy) 1991 96,397
cy 1992 99,790
cy 1993 101,970
ARRESTS
The yearly number of arrests was obtained through the annual Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) for
North Carolina. As displayed by the Table 2a below, the number of arrests decreased from 1991
to 1992, but increased from 1992 to 1993.
24
Table 2a
ARRESTS -ORANGE COUNTY
1991 1992 1993
number of arrests 4,158 4,036 4,701
rate per 1,000 43.1 40.4 46.1
rate per 100,000 4,313.4 4,044.5 4,610.2
More specific information on arrests for both Orange and Chatham Counties are in the Appendix.
JAIL
The rated capacity for the Orange County Jail is 71. In 1991, the average daily population of the
jail exceeded the capacity by 5. The average daily population continued to increase in 1992 and
1993. This may not, however, be as serious as it appears because of the increasing number of
Federal Prisoners that the jail holds for the U.S. Marshall's Service. According to the monthly
reports for 1991, an average of 18 federal prisoners were held in the jail on the last day of the
month. In 1992, that average rose to 27. In 1993, the format of the monthly report changed and
the number of federal inmates admitted and released during a one month period were now
reported. In 1993, an average of 39 inmates were admitted during one month. Even though the
statistics for 1991 & 1992 can't be compared with the statistics of 1993, it is still reasonable to
attribute some of the increase in the jail population to federal prisoners. The number of yearly
admissions for all inmates decreased from 1991-92 but increased by nearly 400 from 1992-93.
In 1991, 85% of all inmates committed to the Orange Couhty Jail were pre-trial. In 1992, the
percentage of pre-trial inmates decreased by 3 percentage points but then increased seven
percentage points in 1993. The average length of stay (ALOS) for 1991 was 10.5 days. This
rose to 12.2 days in 1992, and decreased slightly to 11.6 in 1993.
Table 3a
JAIL INFORMATION
1991 1992 1993
Jail Capacity 71 71 71
Average Daily Pop. 76.3 86.3 94.1
No. Admissions 2655 2584 2969
%Pre-trial 85% 82% 89%
% Sentenced 15% 18% 11%
Ave. Length of Stay 10.5 12.2 11.6
Bond amounts and types of offenses were gathered for 1991, 1992 and 1993. The sample periods
were January 1-7; April 1-7; July 1-7; and September 1-7 of 1991, 1992, 1993; and were used
' 25
according to the guidelines of the Partnership Program. The sample size in Table 4a refers to the
number of admission dockets examined during the sample period. In cases where bond
information was not available, it was concluded that the person was either being held without
bond or was sentenced. Federal Prisoners and inmates admitted due to a writ were only included
in the sample size since they were not eligible for release. Median bond amounts were the
amounts exactly in the middle of a list of amounts from lowest to highest. Average bond
amounts were calculated in the normal way except the highest bond amount for each year was
excluded. This was done to ensure a particularly high bond amount did not skew the average.
The mode of bond amounts were the amounts which were set most frequently during the sample
period. According to the information obtained, there appears to be no overwhelming changes in
bond setting procedures. Average bond amounts as well as the amount most often set (mode)
were quite consistent over the three year period.
Table 4a
6= BOND INFORMATION
1991 1992 1993
Sample Size 222 203 233
Number of bonds 125 107 110
Bond info. not available 53 39 59
Median Bond $500 $1000 $600
Average Bond $2325 $3442 $3423
Mode of Bond $500 $500 $500 11000
JAIL OFFENSES
The offenses recorded at the time of admission to the Orange County Jail were examined. The
offenses were collected according to the same sampling period as bond amounts. Assaultive -
felony offenses included: murder, robbery, rape, kidnapping, felony hit and run, and
manslaughter. Assaultive - misdemeanor offenses included: simple assault, assault on a female,
and other misdemeanor assaults. Property offenses included: larceny, damage to property,
obtaining property under false pretenses, worthless checks, embezzlement, forgery, fraud, and
breaking and entering. Drug offenses included marijuana possession, possession of drug
paraphernalia as well as the possession or selling of more dangerous drugs such as cocaine.
Other crimes included: failure to pay child support, contempt, domestic violence, and fugitive
from justice. Public order crimes included communicating threats, peeping, disorderly conduct,
harassing phone calls, trespass and drunk & disorderly. The category of writ/federal prisoner
means these inmates are being held for other agencies and, therefore, no offense information was
readily available. The categories for DWI, Probation Violation/Failure to Appear are
self-explanatory.
26
Table 5a shows a fairly equal distribution of offenses from 1991 to 1993. DWIs and property
crimes make up about 25% all admissions each year. Although probation violations and failures
to appear (fta) are a result of a previous offense, it was recorded as probation violation/fta to
provide the Advisory Board with an understanding of how common it is for those who violate
probation or fail to appear in court are taken to jail.
Table 5a
OFFENSE AT ADMISSION TO JAIL
1991 1992 1993
Assaultive-felony 6.5% 7.4% 3.3%
Assaultive - misdemeanor 9.5% 4.8% 7.6%
Property 15.9% 16.0% 13.3%
Drugs 2.5% 6.4% 7.1%
'DWI 14.4% 9.0% 6.7%
Public order 6.5% 6.9% 6.7%
Probation violation/fta 10.4% 14.4% 18.1%
Motor vehicle offenses 5.0% 3.7% 1.4%
Writ/federal prisoners (charge unknown) 19.9% 23.4% 19.0%
11Other offense 9.5% 8.0% 16.7%
PROBATION
The number of probation entries for 1991-1993 has decreased over that three year period. The
sharpest decrease was from 1992 to 1993. Even though there has been a sharp decrease in the
number of probation entries, the supervision levels have remained very much the same for the
three year period.
. . .. IEIxUp .1 M =
Table 6a
MJL,'O R
..... ........
..... . .... .........
............
. ............ ....... .
1991 896 96% 2% 2%
1992 813 94% 2% 4%
1993 645 96% 3% 1%
includes those on probation who are currently serving an active sentence,those who are in the military, and those who have absconded from
supervision.
Probation exits were examined to determine the percentages of successful exits and percentages
of revoked probation. Table 7a shows that in 1992 and 1993, 70% or more of those leaving
27
probation successfully completed their probation sentence. Of those who had their probation
revoked, the most likely reason for revocation was a technical violation.
Table 7a
PROBATION EXITS
1991 1992 1993
Total number of exits 333 421 442
Revoked- drug/alcohol use 3% 3% 4%
Revoked-tech.violation 16% 15% 15%
Revoked-new crime 6% 2% 5%
Completed satisfactorily 42% 77% 70%
Canceled by court n/a n/a >1%
Elect to serve time 31% 2% 4%
Died while supervised 2% 1% 1%
PRISON
Prison information was provided by Criminal Justice Partnership Program Staff. Table 8a shows
that the number of Orange County residents admitted to prison rose by two-tenths of a
percentage point every year. The number of Orange County residents admitted to prison for
revocation of probation steadily increased.
Table 8a
PRISON ADAUSSIONS
1991 1992 1993
# of prison admns. 101 95 97
# admitted for p.v. 55 80 111
Rate per 1,000 1.6 1.8 2
Rate per 100,000 161.8 175.4 204
Table 9a profiles the typical inmate from Orange County committed to the Department of
Correction during fiscal year 1993-94. The table illustrates both felony and misdemeanant
admissions and includes probation revocations as well as direct prison sentences. Much of the
information provided below was a result of the offenders "self report" at the time of admission to
prison. This should be remembered because the result is subjective information that was defined
28
only by the person being admitted. For example, one offender may consider frequent drug use as
once a day while another offender may consider frequent drug as_using drugs three times a day.
Table 9a
PRISONER PROFILE - fy 1993-94
CRITERIA.; ;' N MISDENMANAN'I':;
Sample size 103 67
Race and sex Black male (77%) Black male (58%)
Age at admission 25 - 34 (41%) 25 - 34 (51%)
Length of sentence 5 years or more (71%) 2 -3 years (48°1%)
Occupation Class Unskilled(55%) Semiskilled(37%)
Alcohol Use Occasional (52%) Occasional (46%)
Frequent(30%) Frequent(33%)
Drug Use Frequent(35%) Never(37%)
Occasional(34°10) Occasional(33%)
Education Grade 12 (30%), Grade 12 (33%)
Prior incarcerations None (46%) None (49%)
One(26%) More than one(24°1x)
OFFENSE AT ADNIISSION
Assaultive 22% 24%
Sexual assault 12% 0
Property crime 31% 30%
Drugs 32% 1%
DWI 0 15%
Motor vehicle 2% 30%
Other 1% 0
PAROLE
Offenders who commit a crime on or after October 1, 1994 will no longer have parole available
to them as a release option if they are incarcerated. The information on parole is provided
because those placed on parole before October 1, 1994 will be supervised by the Department of
Correction until the parole is either terminated or successfully completed. It is expected that
there will not be a significant reduction of parole caseloads until 1995 or 1996.
29
Table 10a
PAROLE INFORMATION -
1991 1992 1993
number of parole entries 80 68 120
rate per 1,000 0.8 0.7 1.2
rate per 100,000 83 68.1 117.7
30
CI- ATHAM COUNTY
POPULATION
Population projections were provided by Criminal Justice Partnership Program Staff. Table lb
below shows a slow, but consistent increase in county population from 1991 to 1993 for
Chatham County.
Table lb
CHATHAM COUNTY POPULATION
1991 39,566
1992 40,463
1993 41,192
ARRESTS
The total number of arrests reported by the state were taken directly from the Uniform Crime
Report (UCR) for the state of North Carolina. The number of arrests has remained relatively
constant from 1991 to 1992. From 1992 to 1993 the number of arrests decreased.
Table 2b
ARRESTS -CHATHAM COUNTY
1991 1992 1993
Number of arrests 2,775 2,789 2,093
Rate per 1,000 70.1 68.9 50.8
Rate per 100,000 7,013.63 6,892.7 5081.3
JAIL
The rated capacity for the jail is 51. The Average Daily Population has remained below capacity
for all three years. From 1991-1993,the average daily population has ranged between 44 and 41.
The total yearly admissions are the total number of inmates committed to the jail in a one year
period. Although the average daily population is not steadily rising, the number of yearly
admission for the jail has rose. It increased by almost 900 in each year. Of the inmates admitted
in 1993, 82% were pre-trial and the remaining were sentenced. In 1992 only 68% were pre-trial
and in 1991, 74%were pre-trial.
I I M011i
31
The average length of stay (ALOS) is the amount of time inmates are staying in the jail. The
ALOS for 1991 was 13.8 days. This declined slightly to 12.2 days in 1992. And in 1993, the
ALOS declined once again to 9.7 days.
Table 3b
JAIL INFORMATION
1991 1992 1993
Jail Capacity 51 51 51
Average Daily Pop. 44.1 423 4 1.31
No. Admissions, 1170 1273 1301
%Pre-trial 74% 68% 82%
% Sentenced 26% 32% 18%
Ave. Length of Stay 13.8 12.2 9.7
Bonds were examined to get an understanding of the ways in which pre-trial inmates are released
from jail. The sample size was the number of inmates admitted during the sample period
described in the bond information for Orange County. If bond information was not available it
was recorded. In most cases, bond was not available because the inmate was sentenced or bond
was withheld at the discretion of the judge. The average, median and mode for bond amounts
was reported in 1993 only. Information could not be obtained for 1991 and 1992 because bond
information could only be obtained from the jail's computer which began operation in January of
1993.
Table 4b
BOND INFORMATION
1991 1992 1993
Sample Size 98 102 88
Number of bonds 29 21 31
Bond info. not available 22 38 18
Median Bond n/a n/a $500
Average Bond n/a n/a $2,539
Mode of Bond n/a n/a $200
The offenses charged at the admission to the Chatham County Jail is presented in Table 5b. The
information was provided for the sample period described in previous sections for the years
1991, 1992 and 1993. The table shows that property crimes, probation violations combined with
failures to appear, and "other" crimes most commonly occur. DWIs have decreased while drug
offenses have increased over the three year period. Public order offenses have remained very
consistent. As with Orange County, percentages of federal prisoners and offenders in the jail
32
because of a writ were extracted from offense categories because the offenses were not recorded
for these inmates. Definitions of crimes that fit into the separate-offense categories can be found
in the jail information section for Orange County.
Table 5b
OFFENSE AT ADMISSION TO JAIL
1991 1992 1993
Assaultive- felony 1% 5% 3%
Assaultive -misdemeanor 8% 5% 8%
Property 24% 14% 24%
Drugs 3% 3% 5%
DWI 10% 8% 7%
Public order 7% 5% 8%
Probation violation/fta 13% 14% 15%
Motor vehicle. offenses 6% 3% 5%
Writ/federal prisoners (charge unknown) 23% 32% 19%
Other offenses 5% 11% 60/co
PROBATION
The number of probation entries for 1991-1993 has decreased over the three year period. The
sharpest decrease was from 1992 to 1993. Even though there has been a sharp decrease in the
number of probation entries, the supervision levels have remained very much the same for the
three year period.
Table 6b
�Su PIRVV .TS
1QK1EVW**
0,
. ...H..
...........
.............
1991 412 94% 3% 3%
1992 411 93% 2% 4%
1993 368 93% 4% 2%
*includes those on probation who are currently serving an active sentence,those who are in the military,and those who have absconded from
supervision.
Probation exits were examined to determine the number of successful probation sentences and to
determine the reasons for the termination of a probation sentence. Table 7b shows that the
number of probation exits has increased somewhat, but not dramatically. Two-thirds of all
33
probation sentences were completed satisfactorily in 1992 and 1993. This was a significant
increase from 1991. The most common reason for probation to be revoked was a technical
violation where it accounted for 21% of all revocations. The 'Commission of a new crime and
drug/alcohol use accounted for only 4%and 2%, respectively, of alf revocations.
Table 76
PROBATION EXITS
1991 1992 1993
Total number of exits 193 210 214
Revoked- drug/alcohol use 1% 0 2%
Revoked-tech.violation 17% 24% 21%
Revoked-new crime 10% 10% 4%
Completed satisfactorily 37% 64% 66%
Canceled b y court n/a n/a
Elect to serve time 32% 1% 4%
Died while supervised 3% 1% 2%
PRISON
The number of Chatham County residents admitted to prison are displayed in Table 8b below.
Although there was a slight decrease in admissions in 1992,and an increase in 1993, the rate of
admissions remained the same. Of the residents admitted for probation violation, there was an
increase in 1992, followed by a decrease in 1993.
Table 8b
PRISON ADNHSSIONS
1991 1992 1993
#of prison adorns 44 40 52
#admitted for p.v. 33 62 53
Rate per 1,000 1.9 2.5 2.5
Rate per 100,000 194.6 252.1 254.9
The table below profiles the typical inmate committed to the Department of Correction in fiscal
1993-94. The table illustrates both felony and misdemeanant admissions. Information regarding
alcohol and drug use, occupation class and prior incarcerations was reported by the inmate at
admission. Therefore, it is important to remember that the information is subjective and may
reveal how the inmate views himself, rather than how an unbiased interviewer may view the
inmate. Information regarding the offense is perhaps the most reliable because that information
34
could be easily verified. The offense information shows that the bulk of felonious prison
offenses are in the assaultive, property and drug categories. Among misdemeanors, the most
common offenses are DWI, property offenses, assaultive offenses and motor vehicle offenses.
Table 9b
PRISONER PROFILE - fy 1993-94
GRI'I'ERIA ' EI <2 ]1!QSDDEMEANANT
Sample size 41 39
Race and sex Black male(51%) Black male (51%)
Age at admission 35 -44 (34%) 25 - 34 (33%)
Length of sentence 5 years or more (71%) 2 - 3 years (46%)
Occupation Class Unskilled(49%) Unskilled(38%)
Alcohol Use Occasional (51%) Frequent(46%)
Frequent(29%) Occasional (44%)
Drug Use Occasional (41%) Never(46%)
Never(27%) Occasional (41%)
Education Grade 12 (29%) Grade 12 (26%)
Prior incarcerations None(49%) None(44%)
More than one (24%) One (28%)
OFFENSE AT ADN HSSION
Assaultive 24% 15%
Sexual assault 10% 3%
Property crime 29% 23%
Drugs 32% 0
DWI 0 44%
Motor vehicle 2% 13%
Other 2% 2%
PAROLE
Offenders who commit a crime on or after October 1, 1994 will no longer have parole available
to them as a release option if they are incarcerated. The information on parole is provided
because those placed on parole before October 1, 1994 will be supervised by the Department of
Correction. Parole caseloads are expected to decline sometime in 1995 or 1996.
35
Table 10b
imm PAROLE INFORMATION ---
1991 1992 1993
number of parole entries 29 58 50
rate per 1,000 0.7 1.4 1.2
rate per 100,000 73.3 143.3 121.4
INFORMATION FOR BOTH COUNTIES
INDIGENT COUNSEL
The procedures for the assignment of indigent counsel are the same for both counties. If the
offense is a felony, the defendant is entitled to a first appearance before a District Court Judge
within 48-72 hours of arrest. If it is believed that the defendant cannot afford his own counsel,
he will be required to complete an "Affidavit of Indigency" application in order to be considered
for indigent counsel. The judge will determine whether or not to appoint counsel depending on
the information provided on the Affidavit of Indigency form.
Defendants accused of misdemeanors are not entitled to a first appearance in court within a
specific amount of time. This is an area of concern because in some cases defendants may be
remaining in jail for a petty offense as long as a month before appearing before a judge.
USE OF CITATIONS
Citations are used primarily by the State Highway Patrol for motor vehicle offenses in both
counties. Both Sheriffs Offices do not use citations because they normally do not enforce motor
vehicle laws. However;within North Carolina Statute citations may be used for misdemeanors.
Both Orange and Chatham Counties may want to increase their use of citations within the
Sheriffs Departments and Magistrates Offices. A policy change could be implemented where
citations can be used for minor offenses in which it is likely the defendant would appear in court
at the designated time.
36
Total Total Total
Offense Category Arrest Arrest Arrest
Murder 4 7 5
Manslaughter 0 0 1
Forcible Rape 14 21 5
Robbery 42 33 55
Aggravated Assault 164 207 169
Burglary 235 225 195
Larceny 451 .421 415
Motor Vehicle Theft 19 24 21
Arson 2 6 1
Subtotal - Part 1 931 944 867
Simple Assault 396 322 427
Forgery &
Counterfeiting 112 53 67
Fraud 285 478 521
Embezzlement 16 15 10
Stolen Property 65 69 69
Vandalism 26 9 8
Weapons 67 68 102
Prostitution 0 0 0
Sex Offenses 25 25 31
Drugs -173 235 374
Gambling 4 0 0
Offenses Against Family 45 95 77
DWI 612 464 480
Liquor Laws 263 172 264
Disorderly Conduct 166 176 235
Vagrancy 0 0 2
All Other Offenses 972 911 1,167
Curfews- Loitering 0 0 0
Runaways 0 0 0
Subtotal - Part 2 3,227 3,092 3,834
Grand Total
4,158 4,036
.114.7W9
37
t.;ounty
1991 1992 1993
Total Total Total
Offense Category Arrest Arrest-. Arrest
Murder 4 2 7
Manslaughter 1 4 1
Forcible Rape 3 6 5
Robbery 22 12 13
Aggravated Assault 231 160 190
Burglary 121 85 75
LaFceny 153 160 149
Motor Vehicle Theft 5 10 11
Arson 4 1 4
Subtotal - Part 1 544 440 455
Simple Assault 72 153 110
Forgery & '
Counterfeiting 16 36 18
Fraud 729 674 425
Embezzlement 3 6 7
Stolen Property 37 44 21
Vandalism 50 63 26
Weapons 14 21 23
Prostitution 0 0 0
Sex Offenses 10 22 12
Drugs 79 188 23
Gambling 0 8 0
Offenses Against Family 55 47 21
DWI 394 321 337
Liquor Laws 37 23 16
Disorderly Conduct 12 6 25
Vagrancy 0 0 0
All Other Offenses 723 737 574
? Runaways Curfews - Loitering 0 0 0
0 0 0
Subtotal - Part 2 2,231 2,349 1,6381
2,775 2,789 fl:2
+0.5
38
SUMMARY
The population in both counties has increased. Therefore, it is probable that the rate of arrests
will continue to increase with the population.
The number and rate of arrests has varied among both counties. Arrests in Orange County
decreased from 1991 to 1992, but then increased from 1992 to 1993. In Chatham County, the
number as well as the rate of arrests has decreased from 1991-1993. The three offenses with the
most substantial increases in Orange County were "other offenses," drug offenses and simple
assaults. The category of"other offenses" is a catch-all category and consists of a wide range of
offenses from kidnapping to trespassing. The three offenses with the most substantial increases
in Chatham County were aggravated assault, DWI and disorderly conduct. Additionally, the
number of murders more than tripled in Chatham County from 2 in 1992 to 7 in 1993. Because
there were 4 murders in 1991, it is possible that 1992 had an abnormally low number of murders
while 1993 had an abnormally high number of murders.
The average daily population of the Orange County Jail is exceeding its limits while the Chatham
County Jail adp remains relatively low. Both jails held a majority of pre-trial inmates with
neither jail having no less than 68% pre-trial inmates from 1991 to 1993. The average length of
stay for both jails was from 9-11 days in 1993.
The most common offenses at admission in 1993 for both Orange and Chatham County Jails
were probation violation/failure to appear, "other offenses," and property offenses. These were
also the most common offenses for both jails in 1991 and 1992. DWI was also common in both
counties from 1991-92.
Probation entries decreased for both counties from 1991-1993. Intensive probation entries
ranged from 2-4% of the probation population in both counties. In 1993, Orange County
offenders successfully completed probation 70% of the time, while Chatham County offenders
successfully completed probation 66% of the time. Technical violations seemed to be the most
common reason for probation revocation for both counties. However, this may be a result in
state coding procedures, and should not be considered totally reliable at this time.
The number of residents from each county admitted to prison consistently increased during
1991-1993. For the fiscal year 1993-94, the most common prison offenses were drug offenses,
property crimes, and assaultive offenses in each county. Of the prisoners convicted of felonies in
Orange County, 82% of them admitted to occasional or frequent alcohol use,while 69% admitted
to using drugs occasionally or frequently. Similar percentages were present in Chatham County
where 80% of the prisoners admitted using alcohol occasionally or frequently and 68% admitted
using drugs occasionally or frequently.
Parole is no longer a release mechanism for incarcerated offenders. It is believed that parole
caseloads will begin to decrease in 1995-96.
39
PART F. Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Project Turn Around - Chanel Hill Police Dept.
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Felons who are first time offenders and non-addicts.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Provides intensive group program and supervision for 12 months.
4. Average Capacity of Program: 60 Daily Capacity of Program: . Tnknnwn
Average Length of Stay: TTnknnwn
5. Completion Rate: TTnknnwn
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Drug Education School - OPC Mental Health Ctr.
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Offenders convicted of misdemeanor possession of marijuana, possession of drug
paraphernalia or inhaling or possessing toxic vapors. Also, must not have previous
conviction for any offense under state or federal law involving controlled substances,
drug paraphernalia or toxic vapors.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Program meets once per quarter offering 15 hours of drug education.
4. Average Capacity of Program- 20-77 Daily Capacity of Program- TTnknnwn
Average Length of Stay: TTnknnwn
5. Completion Rate: T Tnknnwn
40
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Freerinm Hn„ce
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Substance Abusers
3. Describe Program Activities:
Provides non-medical, non-hospital detoxification services
4. Average Capacity of Program- R Daily Capacity of Program- Unknown
Average Length of Stay: 7 days ---
5. Completion Rate: TTnknnum
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: QPC Mental Health - Regular Ontnatient -_
�Suhstance ahj,ce
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Adult Substance Abusers
3. Describe Program Activities:
Provides individual and group counseling for 8 weeks and continuing care for a year.
Referral to self-help group and other community services as appropriate.
4. Average Capacity of Program- 12-15 Daily Capacity of Program- TTnknnwn
Average Length of Stay: T Tnknnwn
5. Completion Rate: Tlnknown
41
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name- QPC Mental T-Tealth TntPncivP OutnatiPnt Pr dram
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Adult Substance Abusers in Orange County only.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Provides intensive group therapy program for period of 7 weeks and continuing care
for a year. Referral to self-help groups and other community services as appropriate.
4. Average Capacity of Program- 1's —Daily Capacity of Program: Unknown
Average Length of Stay: Unknnwn
5. Completion Rate: IInknnwn
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name- TTnciinerviced Prnhatinn
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Offenders whose class of offense and prior record or conviction level authorizes a
community punishment or offenders convicted of impaired driving.
3. Describe Program Activities:
4. Average Capacity of Program- Unknown Daily Capacity of Program: TTnknnwn
Average Length of Stay: T TTTP.arc
5. Completion Rate: Unknown
42
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name' C'nmmnnity Work Program
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
First time, non-violent offenders who are pre-trial or sentenced. Any offender is
eligible for the non-DWI component. All levels of DWI offenders are eligible for the
DWI component.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Provides opportunities for offenders to perform free work for non-profit or public
agencies as re-payment to the community for damages resulting from their criminal
acts.
4. Average Capacity of Program- 500 Daily Capacity of Program: Unknown
Average Length of Stay: T Tnknnwn
5. Completion Rate: 75 - Rn%
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name'RPa filar Prnhatinn
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Offenders whose class of offense and prior record or conviction level authorizes this
punishment as a sentencing disposition or offenders convicted of impaired driving.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Monitoring, referral to community agencies and drug testing.
4. Average Capacity of Program' 400 - rIntham/900 ('lrange
Daily Capacity of Program: Unknown
Average Length of Stay: Up to 5 year.
5. Completion Rate: Rn%
43
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Oxford House, Inc. - Residential Services
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Recovering male substance abusers in Orange County
3. Describe Program Activities:
Structured living with self-government. Self-help group involvement is the principal
means of attaining abstinence.
4. Average Capacity of Program- TInknnum Daily Capacity of Program- Unknnw„
Average Length of Stay: II mnnthc
5. Completion Rate: TTnknnum
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name:
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
3. Describe Program Activities:
4. Average Capacity of Progra - Daily Capacity of Progra*n
Average Length of Stay:
5. Completion Rate:
44
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: FrePrinm Hpnse-RacidPntial CPrvicP.--.
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Females substance abusers
3. Describe Program Activities:
Structured living, supervision, self-help group involvement, mental health substance
abuse services involvement.
4. Average Capacity of Program: Unknown Daily Capacity of Program: Unknown
Average Length of Stay: TTnknnwn
5. Completion Rate: Unknown
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: TRnCA - ThPranPiitir. rnmmimitV
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Repeat, non-violent felony offenders who have substance abuse problems.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Self government stress self-reliance, acquiring life and job skills and teamwork.
4. Average Capacity of Program in Daily Capacity of Progra*�
Average Length of Stay: T T= tn 9 ge arc
5. Completion Rate: T Tnknnwn
45
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Community Penalties Program
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Offenders convicted misdemeanant or felons who are in imminent and substantial
threat of imprisonment.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Provides sentencing plans to judges "to be used in lieu of an at less cost than
imprisonment".
4. Average Capacity of Program- 45 Daily Capacity of Program: TTnknnwn
Average Length of Stay: TTnknnwn
5. Completion Rate: T Tnknnwn
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name:
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
3. Describe Program Activities:
4. Average Capacity of Programs Daily Capacity of Progra*n�
Average Length of Stay:
5. Completion Rate:
46
PART F: Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Tntencive Ciinervised Prnhstinn
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Prison-bound offenders who class offense and prior record or conviction level
authorizes this punishment and who is sentenced by a judge to this punishment.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Monitoring, referral to community Agencies and drug testing.
4. Average Capacity of Program: 50-Chatham/90-Orange
Daily Capacity of Program: Unknown
Average Length of Stay: TTnl-nnwn
5. Completion Rate: Unknown
Community Resources
1. Agency and Program Name: Hn»me Arred with Flertrnnir. Mnnitnrino
2. Describe the Target Offender Population in terms of their specific characteristics
such as race, gender, age, substance use, employment, marital status, etc:
Offenders who class of offense and prior record or conviction level authorizes this
punishment and who is sentenced to this punishment by a judge.
3. Describe Program Activities:
Monitoring, referral to community agencies and drug testing.
4. Average Capacity of Program- R-10-Chatham/17_nrange
Daily Capacity of Program- Unlcnnum
Average Length of Stay: 6n claw
5. Completion Rate: TTnknnwn
47
SUMMARY
The population in both counties has increased. Therefore, it is probable that the rate of arrests
will continue to increase with the population.
The number and rate of arrests has varied among both counties. Arrests in Orange County
decreased from 1991 to 1992, but then increased from 1992 to 1993. In Chatham County, the
number as well as the rate of arrests has decreased from 1991-1993. The three offenses with the
most substantial increases in Orange County were "other offenses," drug offenses and simple
assaults. The category of"other offenses" is a catch-all category and consists of a wide range of
offenses from kidnapping to trespassing. The three offenses with the most substantial increases
in Chatham County were aggravated assault, DWI and disorderly conduct. Additionally, the
number of murders more than tripled in Chatham County from 2 in 1992 to 7 in 1993. Because
there were 4 murders in 1991, it is possible that 1992 had an abnormally low number of murders
while 1993 had an abnormally high number of murders.
The average daily population of the Orange County Jail is exceeding its limits while the Chatham
County Jail adp remains relatively low. Both jails held a majority of pre-trial inmates with
neither jail having no less than 68%pre-trial inmates from 1991 to 1993. The average length of
stay for both jails was from 9-11 days in 1993.
The most common offenses at admission in 1993 for both Orange and Chatham County Jails
were probation violation/failure to appear, "other offenses," and property offenses. These were
also the most common offenses for both jails in 1991 and 1992. DWI was also common in both
counties from 1991-92.
Probation entries decreased for both counties from 1991-1993. Intensive probation entries
ranged from 2-4% of the probation population in both counties. In 1993, Orange County
offenders successfully completed probation 70% of the time, while Chatham County offenders
successfully completed probation 66% of the time. Technical violations seemed to be the most
common reason for probation revocation for both counties. However, this may be a result in
state coding procedures, and should not be considered totally reliable at this time.
The number of residents from each county admitted to prison consistently increased during
1991-1993. For the fiscal year 1993-94, the most common prison offenses were drug offenses,
property crimes, and assaultive offenses in each county. Of the prisoners convicted of felonies in
Orange County, 82%of them admitted to occasional or frequent alcohol use,while 69% admitted
to using drugs occasionally or frequently. Similar percentages were present in Chatham County
where 80% of the prisoners admitted using alcohol occasionally or frequently and 68% admitted
using drugs occasionally or frequently.
Parole is no longer a release mechanism for incarcerated offenders. It is believed that parole
caseloads will begin to decrease in 1995-96.
1 '
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Application for Implementation Funding
PAGE ONE OF FOUR
Please type all information. See reverse for instructions. Do not exceed the space provided. This
application should be an executive summary of the County Community-Based Corrections Plan.
1. County or Multi-County Grange-Chatham
County Contact Person ,4hArrnn H_ Wer, Management Analvct
County FEIN
County Contact Person's Address, Telephone and FAX number
P. O. Boa 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278; (919) 732-8181; Fax #: 644-3004
2. Fiscal Agent's Name, Address, Telephone and FAX Number
Kenneth Chavious, Finance Director, P. O. Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278
(919) 732-8181; Fax #: 644-3009
3. Beginning date: 04/ 01/ 95
Ending date: 06130196
4. Type of project/Project name:
Orange-Chatham Community-Based Corrections Plan
5. Funds requested $ 181,841
6. Authorizing Officials (Name & TitIe)
Moses Carey, Chair, O a ge County . .
Board of Commissi rs
off-
Uva Holland, Chair, Chatham County
Board of Commissioners
7. Type of application: ✓ First application _ Continuation of
funding
12.19-94 CJPP Annual Plan Fuel Draft For usa in first round—plan end apocaon&N V IY91
. 2
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Application for Implementation Funding
PAGE TWO OF FOUR
8. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION--Describe the project. Include summary data about
the target population and how the program will serve that population.
The Orange-Chatham Criminal Justice Partnership Advisory Board will contract with a
private, non-profit agency to develop, implement, administer, coordinate, monitor and
evaluate a pre-trail release program. The program would include assessment and pre-
trial supervision services. Additionally, the advisory board will contract with a private,
non-profit/private for-profit or County Agency to develop, implement, administer,
coordinate, monitor and evaluate a program to provide a menu of substance abuse
treatment options to offenders sentenced to intensive/high risk probation. Services
would include, but not be limited to case management, intensive outpatient services,
detoxification, residential services, vocational services, transportation and drug testing.
(Summary data included.in Section C)
9. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE--Give information about start dates and
milestones; indicate who is responsible for each milestone and when it will be
reached.
O Request for Proposals developed by April 30, 1995
® Contractors will be selected by June 30, 1995
O Contracts will begin implementation of programs by September 30, 1995.
12-19-94 C1PP Annual Plan Final Draft For use in first round--plan and application due V15195
I
3
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Application for Implementation Funding
PAGE THREE OF FOUR
Project Goals, Objectives and Activities
10. Goals--Projected long-term outcomes or results:
Pretrial Release Program
Goal: To maintain jail populations at or below rated capacity.
Substance Abuse Program
Goal: To reduce the number of prison admissions due to substance abuse.
11. Objectives--Projected short-term measurable results:
Pre-trial Release Program Substance Abuse Program
a. A pre-trial release policy will be drafted a. To provide substance abuse services to
by June 30, 1995. 65 intensive/high risk probationers by
June 30, 1996.
b. 90% of released pre-trial offenders will b. To provide substance abuse alternatives
appear in court as scheduled by June 30, to 100% of all offenders accepted into
1996. program by June 30, 1996.
c. The jail populations will not exceed c. 50% of offenders will complete
rated capacity by June 30, 1996. treatment by June 30, 1996
0 offenders will maintain
f ai
d. 50/0 0
abstinence by June 30 1996.
12.19-94 CIPP Annual Plan Final Draft For use in first round--plan and application due 2/15/95
4
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
12. Activities--Day-to-day activities in measurable terms:
Pre-Trial Release Program Substance Abuse Program
a. Number of offenders confined in jails a. Number of offenders referred
b. Number of offenders screened b. Number and percentage of offenders
assessed as chemically dependent
c. Number of offenders released pre-trial. c. Number and percentage of offenders
referred to alternatives
d. Number of offenders supervised pre-trial d. Number and percentage of offenders
completing treatment
e. Number of offenders appearing in Court e. Number and percentage of offenders
remaining abstinent.
w
m r offenders with no ne
>< f Number o f
c
riminal charges
.. ............ ... ......1 0
g•
Number of revocations.
12-19-94 GPP Annual Plan Final Draft For use in first round--plan and application due 2/15/95
5
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM--NC DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION
Application for Implementation Funding
PAGE FOUR OF FOUR
13. PROJECT BUDGET--Provide a detailed budget for the program. Budget
categories are Personnel, Contractual, Travel, Operating Expenses and
Equipment.
Pre-trial Release Program
Contractual Services - $55,000
Substance Abuse Program
Contractual Services - $126,841
h
12-19-94 CJPP Annual Plan Final Draft For use in first round--Plan and application due V15195