1. Pretrial Risk Assessment Pilot Sites
TN Office of Criminal Justice Programs Request for Letters of Interest
Pretrial Risk Assessment Pilot Sites

2. Letters of Interest Released July 27th / Deadline August 31st
Online at OCJP website:
Tom Pitt, Program Manager, OCJP, ,

3. Program Goal
OCJP’s goal in funding pretrial risk assessment pilot sites:
Enhance public safety by improving justice system effectiveness and efficiency through the implementation of a data-driven framework for pretrial release decision making.

4. Pretrial Justice – Core Principles
• The practices should be fair and evidence based. Optimally, decisions about custody or
release should not be determined by factors such as an individual’s gender, race, ethnicity,
or financial resources.
• The practices should address two key goals: (1) protecting against the risk that the individual
will fail to appear for scheduled court dates; and (2) protecting against risks to the safety of
the community or to specific persons.
• Unnecessary pretrial detention should be minimized. Detention is detrimental to the
individual who is detained, costly to the jurisdiction, and can be counter-productive in
terms of its impact on future criminal behavior.
• To make sound decisions about release or detention, judicial officers need to have (1) reliable information about the potential risks posed by release of the individual; and (2) confidence
that resources are available in the community to address or minimize the risks of nonappearance
or danger to the community if the decision is made to release the individual.
National Judicial College, Dressel, W.F., Mahoney, B. Pretrial Justice in Criminal Cases: Judges’ Perspectives on Key Issues and Opportunities for Improvement, May 2013;

5. Problems with Pretrial Process Nationally
Unnecessary detention of persons who pose no real risk to the safety of the community, or release of individuals who pose a high risk.
Jail overcrowding and associated costs to taxpayers.
A lack of information that a judge or judicial officer needs to make informed decisions about detention or release at the outset of the case.

6. Tennessee Jails
In Tennessee there are currently 46 of 118 (39%) jail facilities that are over capacity.
There are 20 facilities with more than 100 total beds and a population of Pretrial Misdemeanants of greater than 20%. The statewide average is 14.2%
TDOC Jail Summary Report May

7. Jail Overcrowding in TN
May 2015 Jail Capacity - TDOC
Facility (Grand Division)
Total Beds
Over Capacity
% Pretrial Misdemeanor
Middle
191
-89
42.9%
110
-20
41.5%
East 87
-56
35.0%
West
304
-19
29.1%
122
-43
27.9%
261
-58
21.9%
255
-85
20.6%
350
-186
13.2%
Statewide Avg.
14.2%

8. What is an Empirically Derived Pretrial Risk Assessment Tool?
An empirically derived pretrial risk assessment tool is one that has been demonstrated through an empirical research study to accurately sort defendants into categories showing their likelihood of having a successful pretrial release, i.e. they make all of their court appearances and are not arrested on new charges.
Pretrial Justice Institute, Issue Brief,
PRETRIAL RISK ASSESSMENT: SCIENCE PROVIDES GUIDANCE ON ASSESSING DEFENDANTS, May 2015

9. Benefits
Actuarial pretrial risk assessments have a higher predictive validity than clinical or professional judgment alone*.
Eliminates the unnecessary detention of low risk defendants while simultaneously allocating the more intensive and restrictive options (e.g., pretrial supervision, detention) for higher risk defendants.
*Bechtel, K., Lowenkamp, C., Holsinger, A.; Identifying the Factors of Pretrial Failure; A Meta-Analysis, June 2011

10. Why is it Important to Know a Defendant’s Risk Level?
It informs the decision to release or detain pretrial.
It informs the assignment of appropriate release conditions such as pretrial supervision.
Pretrial Justice Institute, Issue Brief, PRETRIAL RISK ASSESSMENT: SCIENCE PROVIDES GUIDANCE ON ASSESSING DEFENDANTS, May 2015

11. Negative Impacts of the Detention of Low Risk Defendants
The longer low risk defendants are detained before trial, the more likely they are to commit a new crime within two years of case disposition.
One study found that low-risk defendants who were held in jail for 2-3 days were 39% more likely to be arrested than those who were released on the first day. Those held 4-7 days were 50% more likely to be arrested, and 8-15 days were 56% more likely.
Laura and John Arnold Foundation, Lowenkamp, C., Van Nostrand M., Holsinger, A.: The Hidden Costs of Pretrial Detention, November 2013:

12. What Do Risk Assessment Tools Look Like?
Most risk assessment instruments incorporate common factors which have been identified as good predictors including:
Current charge
Pending charges at the time of arrest
History of criminal conviction
History of failure to appear
Active community supervision at the time of arrest
History of violence
Outstanding warrants at the time of arrest
Residence/Employment stability
Community ties
History of substance abuse
The Crime and Justice Institute and the National Institute of Corrections; VanNostrand, M.,
Legal and Evidence Based Practices: Application of Legal Principles, Laws and Research to the Field of Pretrial Services,

13. Kentucky’s Previous Risk Assessment Tool
Kentucky Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument Validation: 2010, Austin, Ocker, Bahti, JFA Institute:

14. Other States Using Risk Assessment Tools
Arizona – Public Safety Assessment (PSA) Court
Colorado – Colorado Pretrial Risk Assessment Tool (CPAT)
Florida – Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS)
Kentucky – Public Safety Assessment (PSA) Court
Indiana – Indiana Risk Assessment System
New York – Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS)
North Carolina - Mecklenburg County - Public Safety Assessment (PSA) Court
Ohio – Ohio Risk Assessment System – Pretrial Risk Assessment Tool (ORAS-PAT)
Virginia – Virginia Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument (VPRAI)

15. Steps in the Process
Defendant is assessed using a risk assessment instrument.
Risk level and corresponding recommendation are assigned and reported to release decision maker.
Decision to detain or release with/without conditions is made.
Formal bond hearing is held and decision can be modified.
Outcomes are monitored for defendants and reported to stakeholders.

16. Outcome Measures
Appearance Rate: The percentage of supervised defendants who make all scheduled court appearances.
Safety Rate: The percentage of supervised defendants who are not charged with a new offense during the pretrial stage.
Concurrence Rate: The ratio of defendants whose supervision level or detention status corresponds with their assessed risk of pretrial misconduct.
National Institute of Corrections, Pretrial Executives Network, Measuring What Matters, Outcome and Performance Measures in the Pretrial Services Field, August 2011;

17. Outcome Measures (Cont.)
Success Rate: The percentage of released defendants who (1) are not revoked for technical violations of the conditions of their release, (2) appear for all scheduled court appearances, and (3) are not charged with a new offense during pretrial supervision.
Pretrial Detainee Length of Stay: The average length of stay in jail for pretrial detainees, who are eligible by statute for pretrial release.
National Institute of Corrections, Pretrial Executives Network, Measuring What Matters, Outcome and Performance Measures in the Pretrial Services Field, August 2011;

18. Sample Outcome Dashboard

19. KY Pretrial Services
Tara Boh Blair, General Manager of Kentucky Pretrial Services
Charlotte McPherson, Manager of Kentucky Pretrial Services

20. Kentucky Pretrial Services
Created in 1976 as part of the Bail Bond Reform Act when commercial bail was abolished
Practices mandated by statutes and Supreme Court rules
Statewide program within the Judicial Branch of government (KY Court of Justice)-Administrative Office of the Courts
288 employees divided into 50 programs covering all 120 counties
Provides investigation, supervision and diversion

21. KY Pretrial Process
Arrest by law Enforcement and booked into county jail
PTO investigation (enters charge information, runs criminal history and completes the PSA-Court)
PSA Court utilizes information from criminal history and charging documents
PTO interviews the defendant and prints PT Report

22. KY Pretrial Process
PTO calls duty judge for initial bail decision then provides order to jail and clerk
If released, defendant given arraignment court date and PTO monitors for re-arrest and FTA
If not released, defendant taken to arraignment court (next business day to 7 days depending on the jurisdiction)

23. Pretrial Release Outcomes Data from AOC PRIM database-Pulled 6/25/15

24. Pretrial Release Outcomes
Average Length of Pretrial Release-Unsupervised Defendant = 55 days
Average Length of Pretrial Release-Supervised Defendant = 98 days
Average Length of Incarceration-Pretrial Defendant = 110 days

25. Pretrial Release Outcomes
15,920 defendants ordered to PT supervision in CY 2014 (81% Compliant)
Active Caseload on 06/30/13: 3,583
Active Caseload on 06/30/14: 4,549
Active Caseload on 12/31/14: 5,577
41% of current caseload is low risk
187,097 defendant contacts for supervision (CY 2014)

26. Pretrial Release Outcomes Data from AOC PRIM database

27. Pretrial Release Outcomes Data from AOC PRIM database

28. PREREQUISITES

29. 1) Cooperation and active participation for all local stakeholders in the process
Chief General Sessions Judge
Elected Prosecutor
Chief Public Defender and/or Leadership from the Private Defense Bar
County Sheriff and/or Jail Administrator
Director of Pretrial Services, Community Corrections/Chief General Sessions Probation Officer
whichever is applicable to the jurisdiction; this program does not require a standalone pretrial services program, department, or agency
Court Clerk
City Police Chief
County Executive

30. 2) Ability to gather necessary data to complete risk assessments and report aggregate outcome data to stakeholders
Pilot sites will be required to develop the necessary staffing and information systems infrastructure to collect data on defendants at intake and track case outcomes.
Funding will be available to support enhancements to these areas in a community as necessary.
If your community proceeds to the onsite review stage of the application, (CJI) will provide you with a data request as part of the evaluation process. Your current capacity and the ability to modify existing systems and processes will be given consideration along with other items as part of the assessment.

31. PROJECT ACTIVITIES

32. 1) Map Process / Establish Local Vision
Where are arrestees held in the period between initial arrest and initial court appearance? When is the initial appearance held?
What parties besides the judicial officer and the defendant are present at the initial appearance and what has traditionally been their role?
Where is the initial appearance held? Is there a follow-up bail hearing?
What information is currently available for the pretrial release decision? What data are available at initial appearance hearing?
What legal options are available to the local judicial officer?
Pretrial Justice Institute, PRETRIAL SERVICES PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION:A STARTER KIT,

33. 2) Policy Development
Policy Committee should develop specific program policies and procedures addressing the following:
Target Population
Interviews
Timing of Interviews
Verification of Record Checks Procedures
Risk Assessment and Recommendation Procedures
Submission of Reports to the Court
Bail Review Procedures
Supervision Strategies and Procedures
Responding to Violations of Pretrial Release Conditions
Court Date Reminder Procedures
Release of Information Procedures
Pretrial Justice Institute, PRETRIAL SERVICES PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION:A STARTER KIT,

34. 3) Develop Pretrial Program’s Information System
Local system must be able to gather the following types of data. This will vary based upon the risk assessment tool selected:
Defendant Characteristics
Prior Criminal History
Court Case Record Information (failure to appear, sentence information)
Defendant Case Information
Reports Presenting Aggregate Data on:
Number of persons interviewed
Persons recommended for release by type of condition
Reasons for not recommending release
Number released to supervision
Number currently under supervision
Number of revocations for non-compliance
Number under supervision who fail to appear
Number who were rearrested on a new offense
Pretrial Justice Institute, PRETRIAL SERVICES PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION:A STARTER KIT,

35. Crime and Justice Institute (CJI)
CJI is the Technical Assistance provider and Evaluator for this project.
Project will progress through four stages – Exploration, Installation, Initial Implementation, and Pretrial Risk Instrument Validation.
CJI will work closely with applicant communities and then ultimately with two pilot sites to successfully implement a pretrial risk assessment framework.

36. Next Steps for Applicants
Submit your Letter of Interest by August 31st
to or
Send a hard copy to:
William Scollon, Director, OCJP
312 Rosa L. Parks Ave, Suite 1800
Nashville TN,

37. Next Steps for Applicants (Cont.)
If you are selected to an onsite review, your point of contact listed in Attachment 1, will be notified by September 15th.
OCJP and CJI staff will schedule review sometime between September 15th and October 20th. In advance of this meeting you will receive 1) a list of representatives that should be present, 2) a data collection request, and 3) a list of questions you should be prepared to discuss during the visit.
Target is to have executed contracts in place January 1st