Fostering Criminal Justice/ Mental Health Collaboration: Building Lasting Partnerships Linda Rosenberg Executive Director; PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency Phil Damiani Court Executive Director (Retired); Delaware County Honorable John Zottola Judge; Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division Honorable Sheila Woods-Skipper Supervising Judge; Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas
Webinar Participants In this webinar, government and court officials from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will highlight innova;ve efforts to bring together diverse stakeholders in planning and implemen;ng criminal jus;ce and mental health ini;a;ves. Presenters: }
Linda Rosenberg, Execu;ve Director, PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency
}
Phil Damiani, Re;red Court Execu;ve Director, Delaware County
}
Honorable John ZoLola, Judge, Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas
}
Honorable Shelia Woods-‐Skipper, Judge, Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas
Today’s Presentation Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD)
Criminal Justice Advisory Committee / Delaware County CJAB
Allegheny County Courts
Philadelphia County Mental Health Court
Council of State Governments Justice Center
3
PCCD: Who we are… Established by law in 1978, the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) serves as the jus;ce planning and policymaking agency for the Commonwealth by bringing together diverse and talented stakeholders from local and state criminal and juvenile jus;ce agencies. Members include: judges, prosecutors, law enforcement officers, proba;on officers, correc;ons officers, treatment providers, educators, vic;m service providers, legislators and community members.
Commission’s Goals }
To ensure that the Commonwealth’s communi;es are safe.
}
To reduce the impact of crime on vic;ms.
}
To serve as a criminal and juvenile jus;ce center of excellence by providing research, policy, planning, training, technology, and other special outreach and support services.
PCCD Allocates State and Federal Monies PCCD allocates and oversees over $100 million in federal and state funds to vic;ms, vic;m service providers, criminal and juvenile jus;ce agencies, and nonprofit organiza;ons to help communi;es improve the administra;on of jus;ce.
Justice Planning Efforts }
One of the primary responsibili;es of PCCD is to determine the needs of the criminal and juvenile jus;ce systems, develop and implement policies and procedures to improve the opera;ons of these systems, and support all units of government in their efforts to improve these systems.
}
In order to achieve this goal, PCCD works with local governments in developing plans to address problems dealing with crime and delinquency. PCCD also provides support to coun;es to develop and implement a team approach to problem solving involving the collabora;ve efforts of key decision-‐makers, who possess the authority and responsibility for using and managing county and municipal criminal jus;ce resources.
}
These collabora;ve teams are called Criminal Jus;ce Advisory Boards (CJABs).
Commission Advisory Committees PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency Established by law in 1978, the Commission on Crime and Delinquency serves as the justice planning and policy making agency for the Commonwealth by bringing together diverse and talented stakeholders from state and local criminal and juvenile justice agencies including; judges, prosecutors, law enforcement officers, probation officers, correction officers, treatment providers, educators, victim service providers, legislators and community members.
Mental Health and Justice Advisory Committee (MHJAC) Chair: Honorable John Zottola
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Committee (JJDPC)
The Constables’ & Deputy Sheriffs' Education and Training Boards
Criminal Justice Advisory Committee (CJAC) Chair: Mr. Philip Damiani
Victims’ Services Advisory Committee (VSAC)
Research, Evaluation, Data Collection, and Analysis Advisory Committee (REDAAC)
Today’s Presentation Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD)
Criminal Justice Advisory Committee / Delaware County CJAB
Allegheny County Courts
Philadelphia County Mental Health Court
Council of State Governments Justice Center
9
Criminal Justice Advisory Committee
Mission t
Mission Statement The mission of the Criminal Jus;ce Advisory CommiLee is to support a
comprehensive strategy to reduce crime that priori;zes evidence-‐based policy and prac;ce at every stage of the Commonwealth’s jus;ce system.
Agenda for CJAC Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency Criminal Jus5ce Advisory Commi7ee (CJAC) November 16, 2011 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Commission Room AGENDA I.
Welcome and Introduc5ons Phil Damiani, Chairman
II.
Approval of Minutes Minutes of August 17, 2011
III.
General Updates: OCJSI Funding Update (Bob Merwine) USDOJ Elimina;on of Grant funds for Meals (Bob Merwine) CJAC Mission Statement (Jim Strader) Reentry Efforts (Charla Plaines) Digital Dashboards (Jim Strader) Fingerprint Compliance (Bob Ardner) Law Enforcement SubcommiLee Updates (Frank Williamson & Bob Ardner)
IV. Grant Review: -‐ Jus;ce Assistance Grant (JAG) Applica;ons (Jackie Weaknecht & Bob Ardner) -‐ Na;onal Criminal History and Records Improvement Program (Tom D’Annunzio) -‐ Substance Abuse and Demand Reduc;on Fund (Paul Leeper) -‐ CCAP Augmenta;on Request (Randi Lorah)
What is a County Criminal Justice Advisory Board (CJAB)?
}
Criminal Jus;ce Advisory Boards (CJABs) are groups of top-‐level county officials which address criminal jus;ce issues from a systemic and policy level perspec;ve. CJABs study best prac;ces in the administra;on and delivery of criminal jus;ce and recommend ways in which public agencies can improve the effec;veness and efficiency of the criminal jus;ce system within a county.
}
CJABs are different from issue-‐specific and ad hoc groups, such as county prison boards or intermediate punishment task forces. Unlike these other groups, CJABs provide an ongoing forum for communica;on and joint problem solving among county officials on a wide range of criminal jus;ce issues.
}
A CJAB’s membership is comprised of individuals with the authority and credibility to effect the delivery of criminal jus;ce/public safety and service on the county and local levels. Membership should include top-‐level representa;ves of the courts, correc;ons, law enforcement, community-‐ based organiza;ons, execu;ve branch of government, health and human service agencies, vic;ms’ services agencies, and the business and faith communi;es.
}
CJABs are frequently designated as the primary point of contact with the commonwealth and the federal government for criminal jus;ce maLers.
PA CJAB Regions
ERIE WARREN
McKEAN
CRAWFORD FOREST MERCER
ELK
VENANGO
SULLIVAN CLINTON
JEFFERSON
BUTLER
MONROE CARBON NORTHAMPTON
SNYDER SCHUYLKILL
INDIANA CAMBRIA ALLEGHENY
LEHIGH
DAUPHIN BLAIR
99 WESTMORELAND
PIKE
LUZERNE 476
CENTRE
ARMSTRONG
BEAVER
WASHINGTON
WYOMING LACKAWANNA
LYCOMING COLUMBIA UNIONMONTOUR
CLEARFIELD
SUSQUEHANNA WAYNE
CAMERON
CLARION LAWRENCE
BRADFORD
TIOGA
POTTER
PERRY HUNTINGDON
LEBANON
BERKS BUCKS
LANCASTER GREENE
FAYETTE
SOMERSET
CHESTER
BEDFORD FULTON FRANKLIN
ADAMS
YORK
PHILADELPHIA DELAWARE
Western Region - Ms. Bobby L. Juip Cell: 412-605-2315 or c-bjuip@pa.gov
Northeast Region – Ms. Jennifer McConnell Cell: 570-295-5051 or 570-753-2659 or c-jemcconn@pa.gov
South Central Region – Ms. Karri L. Hull Cell: 570-263-0809 or c-khull@pa.gov
Southeast Region – Ms. Kimberly A. Mackey Cell- 484-332-2362 or c-kimackey@pa.gov
Benefits of a Criminal Justice Advisory Board (CJAB)
}
Improved analysis of problems. Planning produces the data and analyses needed by elected officials and jus;ce administrators to improve their decision making.
}
Improved communica5on, coopera5on, and coordina5on. Planning provides a mechanism for improving communica;on, coopera;on, and coordina;on among police, courts, correc;ons, and private service agencies as well as between different levels of government and the three branches of government. Improved coordina;on is the result of planning.
}
Clear goals, objec5ves, and priori5es. Planning permits more precise ar;cula;on of purposes and links goals, objec;ves, tasks, and ac;vi;es in meaningful ways.
}
More effec5ve alloca5on of resources. Planning provides a framework for resource alloca;on decisions. It simplifies sehng priori;es for the use of resources to achieve jus;ce goals and objec;ves.
}
Improved programs and services. Planning produces a clearer understanding of problems and needs. Planning also makes it easier to formulate goals and objec;ves and to evaluate and compare alterna;ve programs and procedures.
}
Improved capacity and quality of personnel. Planning focuses organiza;onal effort and provides agency personnel with new knowledge and informa;on.
Planning can result in benefits to the en;re community, such as making the jus;ce system more accountable, more open to the public, more efficient, and more effec;ve. Jus;ce system coordina;on can also save taxpayer money.
Delaware County Criminal Justice Advisory Committee (DCCJAC)
Mission
Through best principles of strategic management and coordinated planning, the DCCJAC is commiLed to improving the effec;veness, efficiency, evenhandedness, accountability, and public and professional percep;on of criminal jus;ce in Delaware County. } }
Established in October 1994 by a coali;on of court and county officials. Provides communica;on, educa;on and recommenda;ons towards the ongoing improvements of Delaware County’s Juvenile and Criminal Jus;ce System.
Delaware County Criminal Justice Advisory Committee (DCCJAC)
}
} } }
Membership includes: Judges, County Council, Community Service, Court Administrator, Court Services, District ALorney, Human Services, Juvenile Court/Deten;on, Magisterial District Judges, Medical Examiner, Police, Pretrial Services, Prison personnel, Public Defenders, Sheriff and others as needed. Chair is appointed by President Judge. Mee;ngs held monthly. Mee;ngs Agendas and minutes are taken at all mee;ngs.
Delaware County Criminal Justice Advisory Committee (DCCJAC)
} } } } } }
Ad Hoc commiLees are established as needed. Assists with Grant Management and serves as a resource for Juvenile and Criminal Jus;ce. Endorses and develops proposals in response to local needs and priori;es. CCCJAC reports is goals and work in its annual Judicial Report. Develops Strategic plans that define objec;ves and the means by which it plans to achieve them. Develops indicators to measure its performance in pursuit of achieving its objec;ves.
Today’s Presentation Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD)
Criminal Justice Advisory Committee / Delaware County CJAB
Allegheny County Courts
Philadelphia County Mental Health Court
Council of State Governments Justice Center
18
MENTAL HEALTH & VETERANS COURT Problem Solving Courts
Prepared by The Honorable John A. Zottola
What are Problem Solving Courts? Examples: } } } }
Drug Court Mental Health Court DUI Court Veterans Court
PROBLEM SOLVING COURT
WHY? SAVE $ ? EFFECTIVE ?
PROBLEM SOLVING COURT (Non-Traditional) Vs. TRADITIONAL COURTS
HORIZONTAL (Team Approach) Vs. VERTICAL (Traditional Approach)
A Comparison of Transformed and Traditional Court Procedures Traditional Process Dispute resolution
Transformed Process Problem-solving dispute avoidance
Legal outcome
Therapeutic outcome
Adversarial process
Collaborative process
Claim- or case-oriented
People oriented
Rights-based
Interest- or needs-based
Emphasis placed on adjudication
Emphasis placed on postadjudication and alternative dispute resolution
Traditional Process (cont’d)
Transformed Process
Interpretation and application of law
Interpretation and application of social science
Judge as arbiter
Judge as coach, social worker, cheerleader, case manager or risk manager, member of treatment or therapy team, listener, translator, lead actor in courtroom drama
Backward looking
Forward looking
Precedent-based
Planning-based
Traditional Process (cont’d)
Transformed Process
Few participants and Stakeholders
Wide range of participants and stakeholders
Individualistic
Independent
Legalistic
Common-sensical
Formal
Informal
Efficient
Effective
Judge Roger K. Warren, President of the National Center for State Courts.
Program: Allegheny County Mental Health & Veterans Court Goal: The goal of the Allegheny County Mental Health and Veterans Courts are to provide a countywide, community-based integrated system of treatment and care for individuals with mental disabilities and veterans who are involved in the criminal justice system while ensuring public safety. Objectives: } To establish effective collaboration, communication and functioning between the criminal court division of the court system and the behavioral health system. } To create a balance between ensuring public safety and providing community based treatment options for the offender with mental disabilities or the veteran. } To ensure good legal representation, timely processing and appropriate sentencing for the offender with mental disabilities or the veteran. } To aid the Court in diagnostic and evaluation services as a means to render appropriate sentencing and disposition options. } To establish a cost efficient and accelerated adjudication process when indicated for the offender with mental disabilities or the veteran.
Objectives: (cont’d) }
}
}
To sustain effective community supervision, treatment and support through a collaborative strategy involving both the criminal court division and the behavioral health system via the establishment of mental health community based individualized Service Plan to satisfy the mental health mandate of the sentencing disposition. To lower the recidivism rates of the offender with mental disabilities or the veteran promoting stability and quality of life through treatment compliance and the utilization of community based mental health services. To reduce overcrowding in jail facilities.
MENTAL HEALTH &VETERANS COURT CORE TEAM MEMBERS Judge District Attorney Public Defender/Office of Conflict Counsel Justice Related Services – Human Services Probation Officer Veterans Justice Outreach ADDITIONAL TEAM MEMBERS Mentor Veterans Leadership Program CTT – Community Treatment Team
MENTAL HEALTH & VETERANS COURT TEAM Key to a good program is a good team. A good team is a dedicated, cooperative team that recognizes competing interests on the team, but works to achieve the ultimate goal. Trust is extremely important among the members. The DA and Probation have to be able to trust JRS and the VJO to report program failures or behavioral problems. JRS and the VJO and the clients have to trust that the DA and Probation believe in treatment over incarceration.
FOCUS IS DIVERSION OF THE OFFENDER WITH MENTAL HEALTH DISABILITIES AND THE VETERAN IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. SEQUENTIAL INTERCEPT MODEL.
•
Criteria for Eligibility: Mental Health Court Defendant is 18 years or older
•
Diagnosis: Qualifying Axis I mental Illness
•
JRS: Assessment
•
Consent: MHC is a voluntary program
•
JRS approval
•
Public Defender approval
•
District Attorney approval
• Victim Consent
Criteria for Eligibility: Veterans Court § Defendant is 18 years or older and a current military member in good standing or a member of the military who was not dishonorably discharged § Documented qualifying Axis I diagnosis § Voluntary participation by a defendant § The victim consented to the case proceeding in VC § VA approval § Defense Counsel approval § District Attorney approval
Criteria for Eligibility: Mental Health Court }
Defendant is 18 years or older
}
Diagnosis: Qualifying Axis I mental Illness
}
JRS: Assessment
}
Consent: MHC is a voluntary program
}
JRS approval
}
Public Defender approval
}
District Attorney approval
}
Victim Consent
Criteria for Eligibility:Veteran’s Court }
Defendant is 18 years or older and a current military member in good standing or a member of the military who was not dishonorably discharged
}
Documented qualifying Axis I diagnosis
}
Voluntary participation by a defendant
}
The victim consented to the case proceeding in VC
}
VA approval
}
Defense Counsel approval
}
District Attorney approval
CRIME ELIGIBILITY Most misdemeanors and felonies. Exceptions:
Homicide Sexual Offenders
Mechanics of Mental Health & Veterans Court Two (2) types of Sessions: 1.
Plea or Non-Jury adjudication into The Court. 1a) 99% are negotiated pleas. This often addresses the issue of sentences outside of the sentencing guidelines.
2.
Review Hearings Positive – meeting all goals; treatment, D&A, housing Negative – missing meetings, re-offending, positive urines Neutral – Positive – negative designation is often an area of dispute among the team members.
In Chambers team review of all matters on agenda prior to courtroom proceeding.
CONDITIONS OF SENTENCE }
Comply with all aspects of individualized service plan.
}
Must take prescribed medications.
}
Attend all recommendation/ordered treatment.
}
Refrain from use of illegal substances, alcohol.
}
Urine & drug screen – routine but random.
This Service Plan might include requirements such as: } } } } } } } } }
Comply with the plan put in place by Veterans Justice Outreach if a veteran or JRS plan if in Mental Health Court Anger Management Drug & Alcohol Evaluation, Treatment, & Random Testing Inpatient Drug Treatment No contact or no violent contact with the victim or witness Restitution Electronic Monitoring Parenting Classes Any other course of treatment as determined by the Court
CONTINUUM OF SANCTIONS AND REWARDS Negative Sanctions: } Increased reporting to probation } Increased drug screening } Defendant may be sent to jail for an afternoon or may remain incarcerated for longer periods up to several months depending on the severity of the violation } Defendant may be remanded to an inpatient treatment program } Defendant may be placed on Electronic Monitoring } Defendant may have the current probationary period revoked, and an extended period imposed } Defendant may incur a curfew or loss of liberties
REWARDS }
Increase in length between reporting to Court and probation
}
Loosening of restrictions as part of Service Plan, ie, curfew, house arrest, treatment meetings
}
Eligible for graduation after ½ completion of probation
}
Graduation and Challenge coin
SOME KEY SUCCESSES OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY MHC THROUGH 2011 }
}
Court worked with and supported stakeholders to streamline procedures and expand dedicated court time to expand services to a greater number of participants resulting in a MHC three year expansion from 85 participants to well over 400 participants yearly, and VC having served approximately 150 veterans to date. Court worked with and supported the prosecutor to enable the acceptance of more serious felony cases into MHC and VC based on the Rand Corporation Study indicating: } } }
* Court and stakeholder resources more wisely utilized * More appropriate and more serious offenders are better served over the long term * Greater tax dollar savings
when participants who are charged with more serious crimes receive long term treatment and intensive supervision.
SOME KEY SUCCESSES OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY MHC THROUGH 2011 }
Substantially lower recidivism rate as defined by the Rand Corporation Study of Allegheny County Mental Health Court: 14% for MHC versus 65% for general population.
}
The Court has developed and implemented a peer support program for Veterans Court and has worked to establish a peer support program for Mental Health Court. The program includes appropriate peer/mentor training, guidelines and expectations, and the filming of a court simulation video for instructional purposes for potential peer mentors.
}
CHALLENGES
} }
} }
Staff and budgetary constraints, as courts grow so do needs. Do more with less. Maintaining trust and collaboration among team members. Easier over time because of court successes and quarterly out of court discussion sessions. Placement issues for treatment and for housing. Continued public education regarding effectiveness and need for problem solving approaches on criminal justice.
Today’s Presentation Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD)
Criminal Justice Advisory Committee / Delaware County CJAB
Allegheny County Courts
Philadelphia County Mental Health Court
Council of State Governments Justice Center
42
Criminal re-entry collaboration
Examining Need & Demand
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA AND MENTAL ILLNESS
There is an extraordinary demand for mental health services in Philadelphia:
In 2002: 76,203 individuals received publicly supported mental health services in the City. • 17% of the Philadelphia mental health popula;on have a dual mental health and intellectual disabili;es. • 32% of the Philadelphia mental health popula;on have a dual mental illness and substance abuse diagnosis.
Criminal justice AND MENTAL ILLNESS The critical demand for mental health services in Philadelphia extends to criminal justice settings. A 2007 study of 240 inmates housed in the jail’s most intensive mental health units illustrated a high demand for behavioral health treatment of inmates with SMI diagnosis. • Currently, 27.6% of the inmates in PPS are on the Behavioral Health case load. (a 7.6% increase from 2011) • Currently, 17.5% have been diagnosed as Seriously Mentally Ill (SMI); suffering from schizophrenia, bi-‐polar disorder or major depressive disorder. (a 2.5% increase from 2011) • Approximately 80% of inmates listed on the mental health caseload have a SMI diagnosis and/or a co-‐occurring diagnosis.
• History
• Startup • Stakeholders
• • • • • • • •
Supervising Judge Woods-Skipper Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual Disabilities Philadelphia Public Defender Association Philadelphia District Attorney Adult Probation & Parole Department Philadelphia Prison System First Judicial District Administrative Staff Case Management & Treatment Teams
• Expertise and influence • Buy-in: to open doors to resources and services • Support common goals and purpose • Improves outcome • Helps to address WIFM (What’s in it for me) principle • Accountability
Project design & implementation The First Judicial District Mental Health Court employs a multidisciplinary, collaborative approach that combines intensive wrap-around treatment and individualized probation supervision. FJDMHC identifies individuals who are willing to accept a higher level of supervision in exchange for being placed in treatment facilities outside the Philadelphia Prison System. Participants are monitored throughout the re-entry process by providing a continuum of care through the DBH/IDS Targeted Case Management Unit.
Program Goals • To facilitate the re-entry of offenders with mental illness from incarceration into supervised community treatment settings. • To provide treatment, housing, benefits, and community support services for defendants with mental illness. • To reduce recidivism by defendants with mental illness. • To support effective communication between the criminal justice and mental health systems. • To preserve public safety.
First Judicial District Mental Health Court
Asser;ve Community Treatment
(ACT ) Track 1 (26 par5cipants)
Competency Assessment Track
(CAT) Track 6 (350 participants)
Blended Enhanced Case Management
Blended Case Management
Veterans Evalua;on Track
(BECM)
(BCM)
(VET)
Track 2 (24 par5cipants)
Track 3 (20 par5cipants)
Track 4 (2 par5cipants)
Forensic Alterna;ve Services Track
(FAST ) Track 5 (31 par5cipants)
FJDMHC Structure and Process Adult Probation & Parole Department Specialized proba;on officer from the Mental Health unit of APPD is assigned to supervise all FJDMHC cases. The role of the proba;on officer: • Supervise sentenced offenders admiLed to the FJDMHC. All par;cipants of the FJDMHC are subject to all rules and regula;ons of the adult proba;on and parole department • Communica;on between the treatment team is essen;al and frequent • Informa;on is forwarded to the Judge as appropriate and/or presented at the status hearings
• Reduce recidivism • Expanded court • Successful graduate is now a program director who provides the court with updates of defendants within FJDMHC.
Challenges • Housing • Systems resources • Confidentiality between systems • Consumer independence to make medical and/or psychiatric decisions • Court priorities versus treatment priorities • Family involvement • Sustainability • Staffing shortages with justice partners • Budgeting issues
Since July 2009, MHC has $aved
20, 878 Incarceration Days a $avings total of Â
$2,131,985.20
Questions for the Panelists • Was collabora;on key to the success of your ini;a;ve? • Who were the stakeholders in each of your ini;a;ves? • How did you get support and buy in from each of these stakeholders? • What were some of the barriers/challenges that you had to overcome in order to implement your ini;a;ve and how did you overcome them? • What are some of the philosophical differences between stakeholders from the Human Services System and the Criminal Jus;ce System? Did you ever find that you had difficulty communica;ng with each other because each system has a unique nomenclature?
Questions for the Panelists • What are some of the key accomplishments of your ini;a;ve? • Is there an individual or agency who was one of the key supporters and/or leaders in your ini;a;ve that surprised you? • How have you been able to sustain your ini;a;ve? • What other types of ini;a;ves developed as a result of the trust that was established during the development and implementa;on of your ini;a;ve? • How have you been able to get individuals from Human Services and the Criminal Jus;ce System to work collabora;vely and how have you been able to get them to see a common vision? • What recommenda;ons do you have for other individuals who are trying to build collabora;ve ini;a;ves? • Do you capture performance measures or outcomes?
Thank You! The webinar recording and PowerPoint presentation will be available on www.consensusproject.org within a few days. This material was developed by the presenters for this webinar. Presentations are not externally reviewed for form or content and as such, the statements within reflect the views of the authors and should not be considered the official position of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Justice Center, the members of the Council of State Governments, or funding agencies supporting the work. Suggested Citation: Presenter Last Name, Presenter First Name. “Title of Webinar.� Webinar held by the Council of State Governments Justice Center, New York, NY, Month day, year. .
Council of State Governments Justice Center
61