Presentation on theme: "Local Utility of Cost Benefit Analysis"— Presentation transcript:
1 Local Utility of Cost Benefit Analysis By: Erin Dalton, Allegheny County, PA
2 AGENDA Recent cost benefit studies Current project How we got here 7/16/2012AGENDAHow we got hereRecent cost benefit studiesCurrent project2
3 7/16/2012Jail CollaborativeFormed in 2000 to improve public safety, restrain the growth in Jail costs, and prevent the disintegration of communities and families impacted by crime and incarceration.Led by President Judge and Administrative Judge for Criminal Court--Court of Common Pleas; Warden, Allegheny County Jail; Director, Allegheny County Health Department; and Director, Allegheny County Department of Human Services.Other members of the Jail Collaborative include the Civic Advisory Committee—community leaders who provide guidance and support for reentry programs—as well as dozens of agencies and volunteers.3
5 Jail Collaborative’s 3 Strategies 7/16/2012Jail Collaborative’s 3 Strategies5ReentrySystems changeAlternativesHelen: use this to say that we have 3 basic strategies. First is Reentry Program, Second is Systems Change, third is developing Alternatives to Jail5
6 Current projects Reentry Reentry Center Discharge Center Second Chance Act Adult DemonstrationSecond Chance Reentry Court GrantRWJ Family SupportJustice ReinvestmentFirst set of county-sitesState siteIT DevelopmentCost Benefit AnalysisReentry CenterDischarge CenterRelease w/in 48 hoursScreening & AssessmentRFP for Evidence Based ProgramsTreatment podsDUI HotelCriminal Court Case ReviewOne Judge, one defendantPostponements reducedIT infrastructure to capture reentry programs
7 DATA WAREHOUSE Allegheny County Housing Authority Allegheny County JailAllegheny County CoronerDepartment of Public WelfareHousing Authority City of PittsburghJuvenile ProbationPittsburgh Public SchoolsAdult ProbationPretrial ServicesCriminal Court• Children, Youth and Families• Aging• Drug & Alcohol• Early InterventionMental HealthIntellectual DisabilitiesFamily Support Centers• HeadStart• Human Services Development Fund• Homelessness & Housing• Low Income House Energy AssistanceProgram• System of Care Initiative
12 FindingsHypothetical to Actual Cost Comparison - Average Annual Costs (One Year Follow-up)
13 FindingsPre/Post Cost Comparison - Average Annual Costs (Two Year Follow-Up)
14 Findings Diversion successful Short term: not more expensive Longer term: saves money“In the short run, the more effective MHC is at reducing incarceration, the more expensive it is to taxpayers”
15 Recent FindingsMental Health Court Graduate Recidivism (3 Years Post- Graduation)17 percent (including summary violations and criminal convictions)10 percent (criminal convictions only)Level of All Convictions≤ 6 months≤ 12 months≤ 24 months≤ 36 monthsTotalSummary violations181411144Misdemeanor1639Felony73363125294
16 Critical issues Where costs/benefits accrue External estimates Level of governmentIndividualsExternal estimatesCosts of crimesCriminal careersCosts of criminal justice system versus treatment
17 Jail collaborative evaluation Allegheny County is saving over $5.3 million/yrGreatest cost-savings generated in areas of reduced victimization among county residentsCost-savings ratio is approximately 6 to 1At 12 months post-release, the Collaborative inmates achieve a 50% lower recidivism rate compared to matched comparison groupNo significant differences in the recidivism between Black and White inmates
18 MethodsCost of jail stayCost of processing offenders in the criminal justice systemCosts of crime victimizationCost of providing services at the jailCost savings associated with Collaborative participants’ recidivism reductionThe greatest cost-savings generated areas of public safety and reduced victimization among county residents – 86 percent of total cost savings.
19 Costing policy options Reduce ALOS by an average of one day to produce a 1.7% reduction in jail bed daysThis is the equivalent of 17,929 days and $1,290,888*Urban Institute Presentation to Allegheny County
20 Utility and challenges Policymakers & Practitioners“it works”“it saves money”“let’s replicate it”Necessarily post-interventionWho saves money?No standardization in estimatesFixed costsPutting the money on the tableConnections to Justice Reinvestment
21 Jail collaborative Introduction to Jail Collaborative Application What is the Jail Collaborative Application?The repository of record for complete, real-time service information for all Jail Collaborative clients. It will also capture information on services, goals and their outcomes for these clients.What the Jail Collaborative Application is not?The Jail Collaborative Application is not a complete Case Management system and is not intended to recreate a provider’s current workflow processNo Services Rendered or Billing at this time (possible later release)New System capabilities that impacts Providers’ daily interaction:Provider Client Management: Record of all assessments, notes, referrals, services and outcomes information for clients.MPER: Central repository of information related to providers, including facilities, service offerings, contacts, etc.
22 Cost benefit analysis – building capacity Communicating value to Policy MakersCreating a set of common costsMaking more informed decisionsGOALS:Allegheny County Department of Human ServicesData WarehouseTechnical CapabilitiesAllegheny County Court (Criminal and Family) - (Juvenile and Adult Probation)Program ExpertiseAllegheny County Office of Budget and FinanceDecision makersInformation consumersAllegheny County Court of Common Pleas – Court AdministrationProgram administrationProgram budgets
23 School based probation – quantifying outcomes Began in 1994 with 3 Probation Officers in schools. Now in 20 of 43 School Districts (21 in PPS)Supervise all Court active Juveniles in School. On-site intakeImprove Attendance, Deter School conflicts, Reduce need to come downtown to courts.Decrease participation in adult justice system. Improve educational outcomes. Reduce recidivism
24 Day reporting centers – identifying goals and outcomes 2 Centers (2009, 2011) – one stop shop for Human ServicesDefine the Goals of the program.What are the intended consequences of the program?How is this different from other probation programs?Cost Analysis – Compare DRCs to other probation servicesImpact Analysis – Identify and measure outcomes
25 system wide measures and goals Agreement around CostsUnderstanding of cost-benefit analysis throughout the countyProcess to incorporate better data into decision-making
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.