1. Evidence-Based Pretrial Programming in Mesa County, Colorado
Presenters:
Joel Bishop, Program Manager
Dennis Berry, Director
Mesa County Criminal Justice Services

2. So How Do You Put The Puzzle Together?

3. Presentation Topics Developing a Collaborative Framework
Forming an EBDM Pretrial Work Group
Writing a System-Wide Pretrial Vision Statement
Implementing an Evidence-Based Interview Tool
Designing and Implementing the SMART Praxis
Developing a New Bond Schedule
Violations Response and Incentives Model

4. Foundation for Collaboration
Commitment by key Stakeholders to review the research.
Utilization of a consultant to identify system weaknesses and potential improvements.
Development of goals and timeframes for improvements.

5. Pretrial Implementation Committee
Chief Judge Bottger, (District Court)
Judge Henderson, (County Court)
Rich Tuttle, (District Attorney’s Office)
Bo Zeerip, (District Attorney’s Office)
Thea Reiff, (Public Defender’s Office)
Alexander Vitale, (Public Defender’s Office)
Ed Nugent, (Private Attorney)
Patrick Gentzler, (Private Attorney)
Dennis Berry, (Criminal Justice Services)
Joel Bishop, (Criminal Justice Services)
Steve Farlow, (Sheriff’s Department)
Jennifer Sheetz, (Data Analyst)

6. Goals of the Pretrial EBDM Group
Develop a Vision Statement
Implement an Evidence-Based Pretrial Tool (CPAT)
Develop a Model to apply the Tool (SMART Praxis – Supervision Matrix Assessment & Recommendation Tool)
Develop a Bond Schedule to replace the existing one
Develop a Violation and Incentives Model based on Evidenced-Based Principles
Develop an Advanced Data Tracking System to Measure Outcomes with regular statistical updates.

7. Development of Pretrial Vision Statement
Obtained key values of Pretrial from the group
Assigned a point person/group to put these values
into writing
Presented to the group for modifications and finalization

8. Collaboration in the Tool Development
The Pretrial EBDM Group worked collaboratively to finalized additional questions to be included in the Pretrial report and develop the format of the tool.
Training of System Stakeholders.
Implementing the CPAT & SMART Praxis on July 1, 2012.
Implementation of the new bond schedule and the new violation response guide on April 29, 2013.

9. You've Got a Risk Level: Now What?
How we use the score:
Collaboratively developed protocol for when to recommend supervision and when not to supervise.
Developed levels of supervision.
Developed response to violations.
Developed new bond schedule based not only on the criminal charge, but on the empirical risk profile.

10. Drug Distribution & Aggravated DARP
SMART PRAXIS
Crimes
CPAT Categories
Felony
VRA Crimes
(C.R.S )
Drug Distribution & Aggravated DARP
Domestic Violence
DVSI 11
or Greater
DVSI 10
or Less
Other
Felony Crimes
Misd. VRA Crimes
Misd. & Traffic
(Does not include DUI)
Cat 1
Enhanced
Basic
Court Reminders
Cat 2
Cat 3
Intensive
Cat 4
Colored Sections (Supervision Levels) Developed and Assigned by Collaborative Pretrial EBDM Stakeholder Group

11. Proposed Bond Schedule

12. Response to Pretrial Violations
MESA COUNTY PRETRIAL VIOLATION RESPONSE GUIDELINES MATRIX
Supervision Levels
(Based on the SMART Praxis)
Minor Violation
Moderate Violation
Severe Violation
Basic
Low Response
Low to Medium Response
Medium to High Response
Enhanced
High Response
Intensive
Low, Medium or High Response
DEFINITIONS OF RESPONSE
Responses may include one or more of the following actions:
Low Response
Verbal warning; May consult with attorneys; Consult with family members and friends; Behavior Contract; etc.
Medium Response
Meet with and counsel client; Increase services or supervision levels (increase UA's, BA's, etc); Referral to treatment; May consult with attorneys; Mandatory contact with attorneys on positive schedule 1 and 2 substance screens; Request an imposed curfew; etc.
High Response
Meet with and counsel client; Must send Notice paperwork to the D.A. & notify defense council; Contact law enforcement; Request treatment as condition of bond; request Pretrial Work Release; etc.

13. Response to Violations
Based on the SMART Praxis Supervision Levels
Three Levels of Violations (Minor, Moderate, Severe)
Three Levels of Response (Low, Medium, High)
Developed by Pretrial Services and adjusted in collaboration with the Pretrial Stakeholder EBDM Group

14. Questions?