1. Presentation on the Phase 1 Report on the Home Confinement Program Orange County, Florida August 6, 2013

2. Phase 1 Scope of Work  Evaluate relevant home confinement statutes and judicial administrative orders.  Evaluate the risk and liability elements of the program.  Review of the organizational structure and supervisory oversight of the home confinement program.  Analyze and assess home confinement staffing levels and caseloads.  Assess and analyze the program’s use of technology.  Evaluate the feasibility of privatization.  Analysis of the potential of discontinuing home confinement.

3. Project Methodologies  Interviewed Community Corrections, home confinement and justice system stakeholders to understand the use and issues with the program.  Collected program trend data for assignments and completions.  Developed a detailed database of assignments to home confinement in 2012.  Conducted a survey of similar programs in Florida and elsewhere to compare features which could be utilized in Orange County.  Analyzed the program and opportunities for improvement.  Throughout the study process met with the County and Community Corrections to discuss facts, issues and alternatives.

4. Home Confinement Program Trends  While the program is currently suspended, its use had declined over the past 5 years – by 32%.  The length of time assignments participated in the program increased by 9% over the period (from 74 days to 81 days).  The number of “successful” completions are up over the period and judicial revocations down.

5. The Types of Alleged Offenders in the Program Last Year  Almost 70% of assignments were charged with felonies.  Most assignments were in the program as a condition of bail:  60% had bails under $5,000 (78% under $10,000); even the majority of felony assignments had bail under $10,000.  Only 2% had significant bails over $50,000.  About 16% of assignments had two or more violent felony convictions (but 68% of felons had at least one prior conviction for any charge); over 21% had a prior failure to appear.  The average assignment had a field visit every 9 days and more serious offenders had about the same frequency of visits.

6. Lessons from Other Home Confinement Programs  The project team successfully contacted five (5) counties in Florida and three (3) out of state.  All of the surveyed counties had electronic monitoring programs in use, most for as long as Orange County.  Most counties had more restrictive criteria for the types of alleged offenders who could be in the program.  Staffing levels and caseloads varied – with Orange County in the upper range of caseloads compared to other jurisdictions.  Most counties utilized a more ‘active’ approach to monitoring program assignments.  All other counties had transitioned to GPS technologies.

7. Major Conclusions in the Phase 1 Final Report  The home confinement program as it operated prior to its suspension had a number of issues which increased its risks:  It had a large number of serious offenders in the program; moreover, bails were very low even for serious offenders.  Caseloads were relatively high.  Assignments were not always actively monitored.  Home confinement is a useful tool in the ‘spectrum of supervision’ available to the County.  A renewed program should address these issues by:  Assigning fewer and less serious offenders.  Address management, supervision and policy issues.  Use more credible technology and actively monitor cases.

8. How the Home Confinement Program Should Be Structured  Continue to utilize electronic surveillance as a tool to monitor alleged offenders and sentenced individuals.  The County’s Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC) should be formally constituted and charged with developing criteria which meets the needs of the program.  Offense characteristics should be for less serious offenses and for people who have performed satisfactorily in prior justice contacts.  The PSCC should also develop performance standards and receive reports from CCD about program performance.  The judiciary needs to be better briefed on the range of pre-trial release options available as well as program results.  The Home Confinement Program should be merged with the Pre-Trial Release Program.

9. How the Home Confinement Program Should Be Staffed and Operate  Hire or transfer 9 Senior Community Corrections Officers to handle cases and 3 Correctional Aids for 24 hour GPS monitoring.  With reduced caseloads the number of field visits should be increased.  Alter shift schedules and assignments; cross train staff.  Rely on the private sector to provide and maintain the most up to date technology; active monitoring should remain a County responsibility.  Make changes to intake risk assessment approaches and better tie to individual supervision plans.  Eliminate the use of RF technology and switch entirely to GPS.  Enhance technologies – anti-tampering and movement monitoring.  Staff need to better initially trained and receive continuing training.  Strengthen guidelines for using OCSO to assist with field visits.