UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐
CLARKE COUNTY
CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE F I N A L D R A F T R E P O R T Carter Goble Associates, Inc. August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Contents Introduction and Executive Summary........................................................................................................... 1 Task 1: Evaluate Current Condition and Capacity of the Jail ..................................................................... 11 Task 2: Assess Impact of Current Criminal Justice System and Diversion Programs on the Jail Population ................................................................................................. 17 Task 3: Determine Need for New Programs, Costs and Probable Impacts on the Jail Population .................................................................................................................... 28 Task 4: Update the 2003 Jail Needs Projections ........................................................................................ 50 Task 5: Re‐evaluate 2004 Rosser International Jail Expansion Model ...................................................... 65 Task 6: Provide Recommendations and Cost Estimates ............................................................................ 70 Task 7: Recommend Implementation Schedule for All Proposed System Improvements and Jail Expansion .................................................................................................. 76 Appendices ............................................................................................................................................... A1‐1
UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Introduction and Executive Summary UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Introduction and Executive Summary The goal of this study is to update the 2003 Athens‐Clarke County Criminal Justice System Needs Assessment completed by Carter Goble Associates, Inc. (dba Carter Goble Lee and hereinafter referred to as CGL) and to re‐evaluate the 2004 Rosser International jail expansion plan. This work program will produce an assessment of systemic trend changes since 2001 and criminal process issues and potentials; and make improvement recommendations that the Unified Government can use as a system and facility development planning guide. CGL has conducted this study in close coordination with the Criminal Justice Task Force and its work schedule. The work scope for this project was divided into seven major work tasks of analysis and planning that were labeled Task 1: Evaluate Current Condition and Capacity of the Jail , Task 2: Assess Impact of Current Criminal Justice System and Diversion Programs on the Jail Population, Task 3: Determine Need for New Programs, Costs, and Probable Impacts on the Jail Population, Task 4: Update the 2003 Jail Needs Projections, Task 5: Re‐evaluate 2004 Rosser International Jail Expansion Model, Task 6: Provide Recommendations and Cost Estimates, and Task 7: Recommend Implementation Schedule for All Proposed System Improvements and Jail Expansion. The consultants met with officials from the County Jail, Court Administration, the County Manager’s Office, and the Criminal Justice Task Force during the course of this project to collect data and direction for this project. Updates were presented at regularly scheduled meetings of the Criminal Justice Task Force as to the consultants’ work and findings to‐date. Task 1: Evaluate Current Condition and Capacity of the Jail • Conditions have worsened since the initial needs assessment was conducted in 2001, especially in terms of the amount of water leakage in both the old main jail building and secondarily in the medical building. Although not as severe water leakage was also detected in the newer 232‐bed housing pods. The continuance of the water leakage places the County at‐risk in regard to health claims due to mold production, which was noticed during the inspection. Therefore, there is a very high potential that the inhabitants will be exposed to risk of mold related health issues. It was noted that the County’s Risk Management staff was aware of this situation and that maintenance staff have implemented measures to remove and attempt to prevent mold growth. • Security systems that were in need of replacement in 2001 still need to be replaced. The electrical and mechanical systems that were inadequate in 2001 are still in need of upgrading. The newer housing pods need some renovation and sealing against water leaks, but if properly maintained can continue in use for many years. • In 2001 it was recommended that the old existing main jail should be demolished and that is even more so the case with worsened conditions today. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 1 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 2: Assess Impact of Current Criminal Justice System and Diversion Programs on the Jail Population • As of July 16, 2008, there were 40 active participants in the Felony Drug Court. The reported capacity is 75 participants. There have been 21 graduates of the program, while 41 participants have been terminated from the program for various reasons. Participants averaged 5.3 prior bookings into the Clarke County Jail prior to entering the program. To date only one of the 21 graduates has had a subsequent arrest in Clarke County. Offenders that have graduated the program account for 21% of all historical participants. The graduation rate for this Court is 34%, which is below the reported national average of 48%. (graduation rate calculations are explained on p. 17) • The DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court had 102 participants enrolled as of April 1, 2008, and had 29 approved participants that were waiting for an opening for admission to the program. There have been 152 graduates of the program (39% of all participants), and 91 participants have been terminated since it began 7 years ago. The graduation rate is 63%, which is above the reported national average. • Current estimated savings to the jail, for both Courts combined, are 16 beds, and $393,356 in operating costs. • Efforts are currently underway for the implementation of a Mental Health Court in Athens‐
Clarke County. • Efforts by the Judiciary to reduce the amount of time it takes to bring cases to trial could result in a savings of as much as 102 jail beds by 2030. • “Nuisance Arrests” have accounted for 11% of the total bookings in the Clarke County Jail over the last 5 years. The average stay for these offenders was less than one day, meaning virtually no impact on bed space needs. However, the estimated time it currently takes to process an inmate in and out of the jail equates to 6,800 hours each year and an estimated $136,000 in salary and benefits. Task 3: Determine Need for New Programs, Costs, and Probable Impacts on the Jail Population • An inmate sample was collected for August 3, 2007, containing information on 516 inmates for the purpose of determining how many inmates would initially qualify for work release or other diversionary programs. o The average inmate had been booked into the Clarke County Jail 11 times. o The cost of incarceration was determined to be $58 per day. o Approximately 16% of the population (85 inmates) could have qualified for diversion; a savings of 22.5 jail beds. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 2 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE •
A Diversion Center that would operate a day reporting program, electronic monitoring program, and work release program, and would offer customized counseling and programs for offenders could recognize a 22% reduction in recidivism. Three options were provided for a 50‐bed Diversion Center. The size and cost for all options are substantially larger than the initial projections made by the ACC Staff. o The total building size and cost for Option 1, with little to no support programs will be 14,575 square feet at a cost of $4,176,714. The annual operating costs would be approximately $633,810, and the per diem cost per participant would be approximately $20.43, which is 35% of the current cost of housing an inmate in the jail. Revenue from participant fees is projected to be $387,813, leaving an operational deficit of $245,998. o
The total building size and cost for Option 2, with a more comprehensive center including counseling and treatment programs for the offenders will be 15,775 square feet at a cost of $4,523,263. The annual operating costs would be approximately $713,309, and the per diem cost per participant would be approximately $22.99; or 40% of the current cost of housing an inmate in the jail. Revenue from participant fees is projected to be $620,500, leaving an operational deficit of $92,809. Option 3, looks at an option the ACC Staff considered which is co‐locating County Probation in the Diversion Center. The total building size and cost for this option will be 18,000 square feet at a cost of $5,184,721. The additional 2,225 square feet of space from Option 2 is for the addition of County Probation. The amount of housing and program space remains the same as Option 2. The annual operating costs for this option would be approximately $1,394,197, and the per diem cost per participant would be approximately $44.94, which is 77% of the current cost for housing an inmate in the jail. Revenue from participant fees is projected to be $620,500, (this does not include probation fees), leaving an operational deficit of $92,809. Evidence‐Based Diversion and Alternative Sanctions Success Examples o Drug courts were found to have a 10.7% recidivism reduction rate o Intensive supervision probation = 21.9% reduction o Vocational education programs = 12.6% reduction o Cognitive behavioral restructuring for sex offenders on probation = 31.2% reduction o Community‐based work and education programs generally successful o
•
Source: Evidence‐Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not; Washington State Institute for Public Policy, January 2006 •
Pretrial Diversion Programs – The National Institute of Corrections published a study by the Pretrial Justice Institute that conducted a multi‐year DOJ funded evaluation of pretrial release and supervision programs in numerous urban locations throughout the U.S. Two counties very different in size and location, Shelby County TN and Monroe County NY reported similar results Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 3 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE •
in their pretrial diversion programs with program participants having 35% to 39% lower recidivism rates than control groups not involved in their programs. District Attorney’s Jail Screening – Some jurisdictions have implemented collaborative efforts between the prosecutor’s office and the jail. In these programs the district attorney’s office assigns staff to the jail to review cases immediately after arrest to determine the viability of the charges for prosecution, sometimes known as “direct filing.” Charges can be approved “as is”, amended, or rejected for prosecution. These programs can cause friction between arresting agencies and the prosecutor’s office, and require open lines of communication and cooperation between the agencies to remain viable. Task 4 – Update the 2003 Jail Needs Projections • Between 2001 and 2007 the county general population increased by 10.2% since 2001, or 1.63% annually thus showing a slight increased rate of overall growth. • The crime rate of Clarke County per capita, being a function of increasing County population and decreasing Part I offenses, has declined significantly since 1998. • The jail’s annual Average Daily Population (ADP) has increased by 17.1% since 2001, an increase of 65 inmates. • Overall, the jails Average Length of Stay (ALOS) has not significantly changed since 2001, despite small fluctuations. (The lack of significant change in ALOS, couple with increasingly high ADP since 2001, indicates that the growth in ADP is being driven by more inmates being booked into the system.) • A “status quo projection” is intended to assume that the trends, policies and the criminal justice system’s response to crime will follow the patterns of the historic data and trends for the past 10 years. o The operational bed capacity need is derived by augmenting the ADP projection by the historical peaking factor (8.27% from 1996‐2007) to avoid crowding by periodic peaks throughout the year. Secondly, a classification factor of 5% is added to allow for custody group separations of inmates into discrete housing units and for temporary relocation during limited down time for maintenance of cells or dorm units. Table 1 provides the conversion of the projected ADP to operational bed capacity need. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 4 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 1 Forecasted Bed Need
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
532.6
603.7
674.8
746.0
817.1
Peaking @ 8.27%
44
50
56
62
68
Classification @ 5%
Total Bed Need
27
603
30
684
34
764
37
845
41
926
Forecasted ADP
Source: Carter Goble Associates, April 2008
After applying the conversion factors, an operational bed need of 603 results for 2010 and in 2020 a total of 764 beds are needed; growing to 926 beds by 2030. This projection of bed needs is lower than the projection made in the 2001 Needs Assessment because the growth of ADP slowed down significantly from 2001 onward when compared to the growth experienced from 1996 to 2001. The previous projection yielded an ADP of 560 in 2006, but historically the ADP never exceeded 438 in any month of that year. The updated projection also used nearly twice as many monthly data points to derive its projection. Jail ADP Potential Reduction – It appears that the current jail ADP could be reduced by approximately 16.8% if the American Bar Association recommended processing standards were met for all six categories of pretrial detention. This is virtually the same ratio of total reduction potential as the 17% that was found in the 2001 Needs Assessment. The ABA standards applied to the six categories of pretrial detainees and the CGL recommended standard applied to probation technical violators are: o Felony Cases – 90% should be concluded within 120 days o Misdemeanant Cases – 90% should be concluded within 30 days o Probation Technical Violator Cases – 95% should be concluded within 30 days It is important to note that while improvement could be made via increasing case time flows by the work of the Judiciary and staff that there could also be a system need such as a change in the scheduling system and associated software and/or hardware. Thus, the time cost of staff and the Judiciary and any need for new software and/or hardware could result in a cost to achieve case flow improvement. Recommended Alternative Future Projection – The 16.8% reduction factor will be applied to the status quo projection to indicate the ADP and compute the operational bed capacity that could be planned for assuming that the above process standards were implemented and sustained in the future. o Table 2 below illustrates the effect of reducing the current and projected pretrial population by 16.8%. With pretrial inmates accounting for 62% of the total through 2010, reducing them by 16.8% yields an overall ADP reduction of about 10.5%. With a 65% pretrial population from 2015 onward, a 16.8% reduction yields an 11% overall reduction to the total inmate population. o
•
•
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 5 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 2 Recommended Alternative Future Bed Need Projection
Projected ADP (Status Quo)
2007*
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
447.0
532.6
603.7
674.8
746.0
817.1
Pre-trial Inmates @ 62% (65% 2015 & forward)
277.1
330.2
392.4
438.6
484.9
531.1
Sentenced Inmated @ 38% (35% 2015 & forward)
169.9
202.4
211.3
236.2
261.1
286.0
Pre-trial Inmates (16.8% Reduction)
230.6
274.7
326.5
365.0
403.4
441.9
Projected ADP (w/ Pre-trial ADP Reduction)
400.4
477.1
537.8
601.2
664.5
727.8
Peaking @ 8.27%
n/a
39
44
50
55
60
Classification @ 5%
n/a
24
27
30
33
36
n/a
540
609
681
753
824
Total Bed Need
Source: Carter Goble Associates, June 2008
* Historical, Source: Clarke County Jail Daily Watch Commander Report and June 2008 sample surveys of pretrial detainee lengths of stay.
o
Reducing pretrial population by 16.8% to meet ABA and the recommended standard for probation technical violators processing time effectively reduces the total number of beds needed in 2010 by 63, for a total operational capacity need of 540 beds. The 2020 operational need reduces to approximately 681 beds, an 83 bed reduction, and the bed need by 2030 is approximately 824, a reduction of 102 beds. Task 5: Re‐evaluate 2004 Rosser International Jail Expansion Model • Using information selected from the Rosser International – CGL report, “Conceptual Design Report, Jail/ Judicial Outpost/ Work Release Center”, dated April 15, 2004, and subsequent analysis by Carter Goble Lee, two overall site planning concepts were prepared. Both options retain existing housing pods A through H, which will be renovated to dormitory occupancy, with a total capacity of 190 beds. In the two schemes, identified as Options A and B, the existing “airplane” is removed and the existing medical facility is retained and expanded. • Both Options A and B have an initial (Phase 1) capacity of 670 beds, including the 190 beds in the existing housing units, with the potential to add 160 more beds in a second phase. The site will accommodate up to an additional 322 beds in an ultimate site “build‐out” for a total inmate capacity of 1,152 beds. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 6 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 6: Provide Recommendations and Cost Estimates Criminal Justice Process Interventions Re‐establish a Pretrial Release Program Current Recommendation: This is still a viable recommendation that, along with other process interventions, could account for a 4% reduction in jail ADP. Office space for 3 full time staff should be located in the Judicial Outpost. Preliminary Cost Estimate: $300,000 minus $70,000 from participant reimbursements. Implement a Mental Health Court as determined by judicial officials Current Recommendation: Plans are currently underway for the implementation of a Mental Health Court. The intent is to divert qualifying offenders to treatment rather than jail. This program should be fully implemented and supported with necessary staff to ensure its success. Preliminary Cost Estimate: $89,391 assuming treatment and supervision are provided by community mental health agencies. Continue criminal case processing/flow improvements: Current Recommendation: This is still a viable recommendation that can be enhanced with implementing measures to better‐meet ABA guidelines for processing cases through the court system. Expansion of Jail Capacity Expansion Current Recommendation: Revised projections indicate a need for approximately 681 beds by 2020 (phase 1), and 824 beds by 2030 (phase 2). The 2 newest housing units (190 beds) should be kept. The remaining, existing beds should be replaced with approximately 491 new beds. Preliminary Cost Estimate: The total cost of a jail expansion and renovation is projected to be $70,297,806. Existing Space Improvements Current Recommendation: Inspection of the existing facilities by our registered engineer indicates water leakage in the medical unit is secondary to the problems in housing, but is concerned about potential health claims due to exposure to mold spores if not properly remedied. Sheriff’s officials have indicated a desire to keep the existing medical space in the future building/renovation plans. The proposed jail configurations offered in this report include keeping the existing medical space. However, it is recommended the County consider replacing this area during the expansion and renovation project. Preliminary Cost Estimate: Included in cost projections for jail expansion and renovation. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 7 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Development of Judicial Outpost Current Recommendation: The Judicial Outpost is still needed to replace the need to provide certain judicial activities in the downtown courthouse. The recommended Outpost plans have been reduced in size and are now included in the proposed jail configurations included in this report. Preliminary Cost Estimate: The projected cost of $1,350,000 is part of the jail expansion project. Development of a Diversion Center Current Recommendation: A Diversion Center is still a needed alternative, and plans are currently under‐way for the implementation of this alternative. CGL recommends the Diversion Center have four 12/13 bed units. Initially, about half of these beds will be needed for work release offenders, with the other beds available for other alternative sentencing programs. Multiple housing sections will afford the flexibility for separating inmates with various needs, and can accommodate male and female offenders. County officials asked for proposed components of a Diversion Center with little‐to‐no programs, and an option with more extensive programming for offenders. While constructing and operating a program‐rich facility will be more expensive than one with no programs, research has indicated that programs and counseling in this environment can reduce recidivism by 22%, compared to no reduction with surveillance and reporting, alone. Preliminary Cost Estimate: A major concern is the appearance that the current space and budget projections prepared by County officials have been underestimated. Depending on which option is selected, based on CGL’s cost estimates the price could range from $4.1 million for a minimal Diversion Center that offers no programs for participants, to more than $5.1 million for substantial programming and co‐location of probation offices. System Coordination Improvement Current Recommendation: The State/Superior Clerk of Courts have recently upgraded their information system, and now have controlled internet access to much of their data. The Jail’s information system was not included in this upgrade. The Courts can access Jail information through dedicated terminals at the courthouse, and the Jail can use the Court’s new system. However, they are still two stand‐alone systems. All components of the local criminal justice system will benefit from a system that integrates data from all justice agencies. See Table 35 later in this report for estimated reductions for required bed space for each of these strategic recommendations. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 8 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Summary Total Construction and Operating Cost Impacts By developing the recommended justice system intervention programs, significant construction cost and annual operating expense savings will result for the County due to being able to construct and operate a 670‐bed jail rather than a 764‐bed jail, which is the required capacity in 2020 if the alternative programs are not implemented. Table 3 summarizes the total preliminary cost estimates for construction and annual operating expense differences and savings from following the recommended strategy plan versus only building a larger jail. Table 3 670‐Bed Jail Proposed Plan Proposed Plan
764‐Bed Jail
Savings
Component
Jail ‐ New Construction
$ 44,322,450 $ 53,622,525 $ 9,300,075
Jail ‐ Housing Renovation
$ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000 $ ‐
Jail ‐ Mecial Unit Renovation
$ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ ‐
Judicial Outpost
$ 1,350,000 $ 1,350,000 $ ‐
Construction Cost Totals
$ 52,072,450 $ 61,372,525 $ 9,300,075
Associated Project Cost @ 35%
$ 18,225,358 $ 21,480,384 $ 3,255,026
$ 70,297,806 $ 82,852,909 $ 12,555,101
Total Project Development
Annual Operating Expenses
Jail
$ 12,100,000 $ 13,600,000 $ 1,500,000
Mental Health Court
$ 89,391 $ ‐
$ (89,391)
Pre‐trial Release Program
$ 300,000 $ ‐
$ (300,000)
Pre‐trial Revenue
$ (70,000) $ ‐
$ 70,000
Total Operating Expense
$ 12,419,391 $ 13,600,000 $ 1,180,609 The Diversion Center is being display separately due to the various options being presented. Option 1 has administrative space, participant housing, and space for a day reporting function, but little‐
to‐no programs space. The purpose of this facility would be to house a residential work release program and a “surveillance only” day reporting operation. Option 2 expands on Option 1 by adding space for more extensive programming for offenders. Option 3 looks at an option the ACC Staff considered which is co‐locating County Probation in the Diversion Center. ACC Staff report that fees paid by probationers fully offset all operational costs. Existing equipment would be utilized if Probation were to move into the Diversion Center. This is why the estimated start‐up cost, operational costs and estimated revenue mirror that of Option 2. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 9 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Diversion Center Cost
Total Capital Project Cost
SPLOST Project 033 Budget
Capital Supplement Needed
Table 4 Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
$ 4,176,714 $ 4,523,263 $ 5,184,721
$ 970,000 $ 970,000 $ 970,000
$ (3,206,714) $ (3,553,263) $ (4,214,721)
Estimated Start‐up Cost
$ 82,191 $ 85,191 $ 85,191
Operational Cost
Estimated Revenue
Operational Supplement Needed
$ 633,810 $ 713,309 $ 713,309
$ 158,958 $ 179,763 $ 179,763
$ (474,852) $ (533,546) $ (533,546)
Source: Carter Goble Associates, August 2008
Task 7: Recommend Implementation Schedule for All Proposed System Improvements and Jail Expansion The recommended action plan requires a phased implementation schedule that involves implementing certain operational interventions immediately and in the short term, but will require the construction of the Diversion Center before the programs can become fully operative. The times allotted for the jail and Diversion Center projects are customary durations for design and construction projects. A fast‐track strategy could accelerate some of these times. Table 5 summarizes the recommended general phasing schedule for all action plan elements. Table 5 2008 Action Item Mayor and Commission Approvals Caseflow Intervention Enhancements ICJIS Committee Report & Improvement Jail Expansion – Pre‐design Study Jail Expansion – Design Jail Expansion ‐ Construction Diversion Center – Design Diversion Center – Construction Implement Pretrial Release Enhance Drug Court Operation Implement Mental Health Court Qt
r.1 FY 2009 Qt
Qt
r.2 r.3 2009 Qt
r.4 Qt
r.1 2010 FY 2010 Qt
Qt
r.2 r.3 Qt
r.4 Qt
r.1 2011 FY 2011 Qt
Qt
r.2 r.3 Qt
r.4 Qt
r.1 2012 FY 2012 Qt
Qt
r.2 r.3 Qt
r.4 Qt
r.1 2013 FY 2013 Qt
Qt
r.2 r.3 Qt
r.4 FY 2014 Qt
Qt
r.1 r.2 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 10 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 1 Evaluate Current Condition and Capacity of the Jail UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 1 Evaluate Current Condition and Capacity of the Jail Inspect and note any significant changes in building structures, building systems, and operating conditions in relation to the 2003 findings. During the week of 21 April Joe Lee a CGL principal and Georgia registered engineer inspected the condition of the County Jail. Mr. Lee had also performed the 2001 inspection as part of the Needs Assessment at that time. Although staff is keeping the facility clean and relatively safe its conditions have worsened especially in terms of the amount of water leakage in both the old main jail building and secondarily in the medical building. To quantify what degree would be difficult, however, it is clear that the building continues to deteriorate. For example, the leaks had not damaged the new medical area when assessed in 2001. In April 2008, there was clear evidence of damage to flooring from the humidity and leaking in around the perimeter of the building. The damage has also spread to the newer housing units compared to the last study. Finally, the older section has continued to deteriorate relative to mold production and leaks. 2007 was a dry year in Georgia and the building continued to leak. A normal rain year would cause severe problems inside the jail and will lead to structural damage very soon. Although not as severe, water leakage was also detected in the newer 232‐bed housing pods in April 2008. The continuance of the water leakage places the County at‐risk in regard to health claims due to mold production, which was noticed during the inspection. The prevalence of mold was spotty probably only because staff was doing a good cleaning job in the buildings, but it is doubtful that its production can be totally stopped. Therefore, there is a very high potential that the inhabitants will be exposed to risk of mold related health issues. It was noted that the County’s Risk Management staff was aware of this situation and that maintenance staff have implemented measures to remove and attempt to prevent mold growth. Security systems that were in need of replacement in 2001 still need to be replaced. The electrical and mechanical systems that were inadequate in 2001 are still in need of upgrading. The newer housing pods need some renovation and sealing against water leaks, but if properly maintained can continue in use for many years. The following pages contain information concerning facility conditions and observations from the Rosser 2004 Conceptual Design Report. There has been continued deterioration in the conditions in the past four years. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 11 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE EXCERPT FROM 2004 ROSSER REPORT EXISTING FACILITY CONDITIONS AND OBSERVATIONS 1981 Jail Facility – 140 beds Existing Conditions The facility shows the typical signs of age and overuse of an overcrowded detention center. The amount of maintenance on the facility has been average with major repairs occurring as required. The following are comments concerning the conditions: • Plastic laminate finish on millwork in Central Control is in poor condition due to the 24 hour a day operation of the area. • Corner in Visitation Lobby has extensive damage due to leakage from the roof and wall above. 1991 Addition – 232 beds Existing Conditions The facility shows the typical signs of age and overuse of an overcrowded detention center. The amount of maintenance on the facility has been average with major repairs occurring as required. The following are comments concerning the conditions: • Corner in Visitation Lobby has an extensive damage due to leakage from the roof and wall above. • There appears to be moisture penetration problem around the perimeter of the exterior openings with EIFS wall finish material. • Vitreous china fixtures in Housing Units show serious signs of overuse. The evolving nature of the type of inmate (more violent) using the housing areas requires a different solution. 1996 Addition – 11 Medical Beds Existing Conditions The facility shows the typical signs of age for the area. The amount of maintenance on the facility has been average. The following are comments concerning the conditions: • Ceiling at Nurse’s Station area is stained, possibly from roof leakage. • Interior wall finish in the Medical area has metal panel finish. Panel rusting was observed in areas with moisture, particularly in the showers. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 12 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE See the following photographs for more information on all areas Topic: Under sized Property Storage Location: 1991 Addition ‐ Intake Topic: Rusted metal finish panel in shower at Infirmary Location: 1996 Addition – Medical Beds Topic: Inadequate Recreation Yard drainage with curb weep holes Location: 1991 Addition ‐ Exterior Topic: Inadequate Recreation Yard drainage with curb weep holes Location: 1991 Addition ‐ Exterior Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 13 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Topic: Too many support column posts in Recreation Yard Location: 1991 Addition ‐ Exterior Topic: Moisture migrates through exterior wall EIFS openings Location: 1991 Addition Topic: Painted metal panels to match EIFS system Location: 1996 Addition ‐ Medical Topic: Existing roof showing excessive mechanical items Location: 1996 Addition ‐ Medical Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 14 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this report was to identify issues and concerns surrounded the existing jail complex and to determine the most critical issues if an expansion of the facility occurs. The current jail shows typical signs of an overcrowded institution. As noted in this report there are several violations of A.C.A. Standards which negatively affect the operations in terms of financial efficiencies, retention of quality staff and safe working conditions for the staff. These issues must be taken into consideration. In summary, any addition, renovation or new construction needs to address the following issues: 1981 Building Recommendations • This building is very inefficient and does not meet most of the current standards. As currently designed and operating, it provides little value to A.C.C. in terms of meeting operational cost efficiencies and should be considered a liability in terms of staff and inmate safety. Additionally, the load bearing construction system of the building is not conducive to wholesale renovation. It is therefore recommended that this building be considered of little value to any future construction efforts. • An expanded judicial component (currently part of the 1981 building) should be considered to reduce transportation costs and streamline the processes at the jail. 1991 Addition – Recommendations • This building does have value if the proposed functions fit the current design scheme of the facility. If the idea is to use these units as strictly high security (which is typical for the design scheme), it is more difficult to put additional security into a building than to take it out. The costs need to be taken into consideration. • These housing units generally need to improve the sight lines by reconfiguring the window patterns at the security post and at the dayroom fronts. • The mezzanine balcony railing should be extended to roof structure above if used as a maximum security housing unit. • Toilets and showers should be relocated to provide for better sight line from the security post. • The Multi‐Purpose areas on the pod mezzanine floor should be re‐designed to eliminate the “blind” spot from the security post. • Provide adequate type and number of drains Exercise yards. • Add roof to a part of the Exercise yards. • Re‐design the entry into visitation so as to control circulation. • Vitreous china fixtures show serious signs of overuse. A different solution for the long term viability of the unit is required. • Repair and patch all damaged roof areas throughout the existing buildings to be renovated. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 15 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE 1996 Addition – Medical – Recommendations • The Infirmary interior wall metal finish must be repaired or upgraded to another finish material that is rust proof I selected areas. • The ambulatory care unit should be reconfigured with separate areas for staff and inmates. Circulation in the unit should be redesigned to allow separate entrance to the infirmary other through the clinic. In summary, several areas parts of the facility have value for inclusion in an expansion based upon the current complex design. As a new design solution evolves some of the recommendations may change based upon the new layout. In 2001 it was recommended that the old existing main jail should be demolished and that is even more so the case with worsened conditions today. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 16 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 2 Assess Impact of Current Criminal Justice System And Diversion Programs on the Jail Population UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 2 Assess Impact of Current Criminal Justice System and Diversion Programs on the Jail Population Document systemic changes that have occurred since 2003 and evaluate the effectiveness of existing diversion programs and review criminal case processes and volumes to determine what elements of any criminal justice system program or process may be increasing or reducing the demand for jail capacity. Particular attention will be paid to pretrial v. sentenced inmates, inmates charged with technical violations of probation, and public nuisance arrests that may burden the system. Felony Drug Court Since its inception in December 2004, the Felony Drug Court has had 102 participants. Twenty‐one participants have graduated the program, and there have been 41 participants that have been terminated. As of July 16, 2008, there were 40 active participants in the program. Most inmates that are committed to the Clarke County Jail with felony drug charges are screened for admission to the Felony Drug Court program. The District Attorney’s office reportedly determines an inmate’s eligibility for the program, and offers either the dismissal of charges upon completion of the program or a sentence reduction. Typical factors that will result in disqualification from consideration are a history or propensity for violence, those that have been determined to be dealers or distributors of illegal drugs, and those inmates that do not live in close proximity to Athens. Clarke County Jail officials have estimated that approximately half of the Felony Drug Court participants were incarcerated at the time of their acceptance into the program. The other 50% were out of jail on bond. Offenders are typically charged a monthly fee of $150 to participate in the program. Current Program Participants On July 16, 2008, the 40 active participants in this Court had averaged 404 days in the program. The newest participant had been in the program for 41 days, and the most “senior” participant had been in the program for 1,030 days (entered in September, 2005). The participants averaged 5 prior bookings into the Clarke County Jail (CCJ). For six of the participants this was their first time in the CCJ, while one participant had 29 prior bookings. Terminated Participants There have been 41 participants that have been terminated from the program since its inception, which is twice the number that has graduated. These participants spent an average of 365 days in the program before termination. They had an average of 9.7 prior bookings into the CCJ before entering the Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 17 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE program. Nine of the terminated participants have been re‐booked into the CCJ at least once, and 6 are currently in prison. Table 6 Athens-Clarke Felony Drug Court
Program Status
Number of
Participants
% of Total
Total Days in
Program
Avg Days in
Program
40
41
21
102
39%
40%
21%
100%
16,166
14,982
13,789
44,937
404
365
657
441
Current
Terminated
Graduated
Totals
Source: CGA compiled from data provided by the Athens-Clarke Court Administration, August 2008
Graduates In 3 ½ years the Felony Drug Court has graduated 21 participants, which spent an average of 657 days in the program. The average graduate had been booked into the CCJ 5.3 times before entering the program. Only one participant has been re‐booked into the CCJ since graduating. It is not known if any have been re‐arrested in any other jurisdictions. Table 7 Athens-Clarke Felony Drug Court Graduates
Program Status
Graduated
Participants
21
Avg Arrests
Prior to Drug
Court
Avg Arrests
Since
Graduation
Participants
Booked into
CCJ Since
Graduation
Rearrest
Percentage
5.3
0.1
1
5%
Source: CGA compiled from data provided by the Athens-Clarke Court Administration, August 2008
The Drug Court graduation rate is calculated by dividing the total number of graduates plus the total number of terminations into the total number of graduates. The graduation rate for the Felony Drug Court is 34%, which is below the reported national average of 48%. Differences in program design, eligibility criteria, and various participant risk factors can impact the success rates of programs in various jurisdictions. Having a lower graduation rate than the national average should not be considered a negative or positive indicator without comparing the program’s structure and eligibility criteria to programs in other jurisdictions. Figure 1 graduates
graduates + terminations
Graduation Rate =
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 18 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE The retention rate is calculated by dividing the total number of admissions since the program’s inception by the total number of graduates plus the number of participants that are currently enrolled. The current retention rate for the Felony Drug Court is 60%, which matches the national average. Figure 2 Retention Rate =
graduates + current enrollment
total number of admissions Costs/Savings Reported revenues for Fiscal Year 2008 are projected to be $112,074. The projected expenses are $108,242, resulting in a net gain of $3,832.1 The Court Administrator’s Office reports there were 33 active participants on January 1, 2007, and had saved the county $424,336 in jail costs for 2006. The savings were calculated by calculating the difference of what the original sentences would have been if the participants had not opted for participation in the Felony Drug Court program, and the actual sentences imposed; a 50% reduction. There are some factors that must be taken into consideration when calculating the amount of days saved by the jail. • Half of the Felony Drug Court participants were in jail at the time of their acceptance into the program. The other half spent typically spent some amount of time in jail prior to posting bond. The amount of time spent in jail prior to entering the program would have to be credited towards their remaining sentence. • The majority of participants in the Felony Drug Court would receive sentences in excess of one year. This length of sentence is typically served in the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDOC) as opposed to the county jail. The average length of stay between disposition of an inmate’s case and transfer to state prison is 65 days2. The balance of their sentence would be with the state. It would be impossible to determine a precise estimate of the amount of savings to the CCJ without examining the case of each participant in the Felony Drug Court. While some level of monetary savings is evident, the actual amount may actually be half of the amount initially reported by the Court Administrator’s Office. 1
Budget information provided by the Athens‐Clarke County Courts Average transfer time to GDOC supplied by Clarke County Jail officials Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 19 ‐ 2
Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court The DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court has been operating for the last 7 years, and has had a total of 421 participants. There have been 152 graduates of the program, and there have been 91 participants that have been terminated. As of April 1, 2008, there were 102 active participants in the program. Most inmates that are committed to the Clarke County Jail with misdemeanant drug charges are considered for admission to the DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court program. The Solicitor’s office reportedly determines an inmate’s eligibility for the program, and offers either the dismissal of charges upon completion of the program or a sentence reduction. Typical factors that will result in disqualification from consideration are a history or propensity for violence and those inmates that do not live in close proximity to Athens. Offenders are typically charged a monthly fee of $75 to participate in the program. Active Program Participants On April 1, 2008 the 102 active participants in this Court had averaged 265 days in the program. The newest participant had been in the program for 35 days, and the most “senior” participant had been in the program for 771 days (entered in February, 2006). The participants averaged 4 prior bookings into the CCJ. Expired Participants This category of participant reached the end of their mandated time in the program (end of sentence or probation) prior to graduation, and was no longer “required” to participate. There have been 47 participants (12%) that spent an average of 553 days in the program before their time expired. Terminated Participants There have been 91 participants that have been terminated (23%) from the program since its inception. These participants spent an average of 409 days in the program before termination. Table 8 Athens-Clarke Misdemeanant Drug Court
Program Status
Active
Expired
Terminated
Graduated
Totals
Awaiting/Jail
Number of
Participants
102
47
91
152
392
29
% of Total
Total Days in
Program
Avg Days in
Program
26%
12%
23%
39%
100%
27,061
25,981
37,254
82,793
146,028
265
553
409
545
373
Source: CGA compiled from data provided by the Athens-Clarke Court Administration, August 2008
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 20 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Awaiting/Jail As of April 1, 2008, there were 29 offenders that were approved for the program, but had not yet begun participation. These individuals were either in jail or out on bond. Graduates In 7 years the DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court has graduated 152 participants (39%), which took an average of 545 days in the program. The average graduate had been booked into the CCJ 4 times before entering the program. There have been 14 graduates that have been re‐booked into the CCJ since graduating. The average graduate has been re‐booked 0.2 times in the CCJ. It is not known if any have been re‐arrested in any other jurisdictions. Table 9 Athens-Clarke Misdemeanant Drug Court Graduates
Participants
152
Avg Arrests
Prior to Drug
Court
Avg Arrests
Since
Graduation
Participants
Booked into
CCJ Since
Graduation
Rearrest
Percentage
Avg Days
Before
Rearrest
4
0.2
14
9%
256
Source: CGA compiled from data provided by the Athens-Clarke Court Administration, August 2008
The graduation rate for the Misdemeanant Drug Court is 63%, which is above the reported national average of 48%. The current retention rate for the Misdemeanant Drug Court is 65%, which is slightly higher than the reported national average of 60%. Costs/Savings Reported revenues for Fiscal Year 2007 were reported to be $409,203. The reported expenses were $316,887 resulting in a net gain of $92,316.3 A recent Court Administrator’s Office report indicated 104 participants enrolled who collectively have served 4,182 days incarcerated since joining the program. Had these cases gone forward it is estimated that these participants would have collectively served 8,364 days incarcerated. This translates into a savings of more than $172,389 in incarceration costs. Also, to date 252 participants have completed the program, having been incarcerated only 7,604 days instead of a possible 17,898 days, that collectively has saved the county $424,336 in incarceration costs. 3
Budget information provided by the Athens‐Clarke County Courts Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 21 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE It is reported that when the Solicitor screens an offender for participation, a typical deal is offered that reduces the projected sentence by half if convicted. If an offender agrees to these terms, they enter the program after serving the reduced sentence, thus resulting in a 50% savings in jail days. One consideration not factored into these calculations is the “good time” that sentenced inmates receive in the CCJ, which is often calculated at one day taken off of the sentence for each day served. The good time would lower the reduced sentence by an additional 50%. Example: • An offender with a typical sentence of 100 days that does not participate in the Drug Court program can earn 50 days of good time, resulting in 50 days being served. • By participating in Drug Court, the original sentence of 100 days is reduced to 50 days. This offender can still earn 25 days of good time, resulting in only 25 days being served. • So while an offender in the Drug Court program will only serve 25% of the original 100 day sentence, the jail days saved in this scenario would be 25 days instead of the 50 days that would have been served otherwise. Findings With 29 offenders approved but awaiting admission into the DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court program, this program has reached its current capacity. This is reportedly due to staffing and resource limitations. The Felony Drug Court is just over half the reported capacity of approximately 75 participants. This number is reported to be the pre‐determined “break even” cost threshold for the program. This Court has begun admitting probation violators that have drug‐related violations. It is anticipated that this may bring the number of participants near capacity levels. National studies have indicated that drug courts can reduce offender recidivism by more than 10%. Both Drug Courts show significant reductions in new bookings for those that have graduated the programs. By offering reduced jail‐time for offenders participating in the Drug Court programs, there is a reduced need for bed space. What is difficult to determine without an in‐depth analysis is what that impact actually is. The DUI/Misdemeanant Drug Court estimates a jail savings of 8,364 days for their 102 active participants. Factoring a typical 50% reduction in sentence for good‐time, and the savings is closer to 4,182 days. This translates to about 8.9 jail beds, and a financial savings of $242,556 when calculated at $58 per day. The Felony Drug Court savings are more difficult to project, given the majority of these participants would spend their sentence in the GDOC instead of the Clarke County Jail. Based upon the available data this Court may currently save the jail approximately 2,600 inmate days (40 active participants multiplied by an average of 65 jail days), which equates to approximately 7.2 jail beds, and a financial savings of $150,800 when calculated at $58 per day. Increase participant levels to near capacity should nearly double the amount of jail days saved and the number of jail beds saved. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 22 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE There are other benefits to the decreased recidivism of Drug Court graduates than fiscal savings for the jail. Individuals that do not recidivate have the opportunity, and incentive, to become productive and contributing members of their communities and their families. This positive and successful experience can foster the confidence needed to secure and maintain employment. These potential benefits have a ripple effect through the public, local government, and the offenders’ families. Steady employment means that an individual is paying taxes. Fewer arrests mean fewer resources are expended by the criminal justice system. Both instances enhance the opportunities to successfully support their families, which can mean a more stable environment for today’s youth. MENTAL HEALTH COURT In 2008 the Unified Government of Athens‐Clarke County and its Superior and Probate Courts are proceeding to implement a “Treatment and Accountability Court” (TAC) intended to divert offenders who have a mental illness to treatment rather than remaining in jail confinement and delaying immediate attention to their mental illness. In many cases mental illness may be the reason for a person’s behavior that caused their arrest and jail admission. If such cases can be diagnosed and diverted to treatment their criminal justice system involvement may be resolved if the treatment plan is appropriate and successful and jail bed need thereby reduced. Athens‐Clarke Treatment and Accountability Court Initial Implementation Plan – The TAC plan targets persons charged or potentially charged with a “felony or misdemeanor criminal offense stemming from their mental illness or mental disability.”4 Participation in the program by persons found to be eligible will be voluntary. However, the program plan also intends to “explore” the use of civil commitment law for persons with frequent jail admissions who are found to be mentally incompetent. The FY2009‐2010 2‐year project budget for the TAC plan is $288,359 consisting of 69% federal grant funds and 31% local funding. With the total federal and local funding proposed the program would be able to provide one full‐time case manager estimated to be able to maintain a 50‐person diversion/treatment caseload. Without the federal funding for personnel it is estimated that only a part‐time case manager could be afforded that is estimated to allow no more than a 25‐person caseload. The plan involves the dedication of Judge David Sweat’s Court with on‐going support services from Advantage Behavioral System, the UGA School of Social Work and the Athens Justice Project. The UGA team developed a program diagnostic/eligibility assessment and individualized treatment planning instrument for the program that is based on the LSI‐R, which is a proven instrument used successfully throughout the U.S. and Canada in criminal justice, detention and correctional systems. With a 2‐year component of the proposed federal grant the UGA will support the program by developing a data tracking system, program evaluations, best practices research and assist with program promotion. The project plan calls for a wide‐range of collaboration with various social and health services provider agencies in the County in order to provide the level of diagnosis, treatment, supervision and support services needed to help the target population succeed in avoiding repeat criminal behavior. In the consultant’s experience this kind of comprehensive level of diagnostic, treatment and support services 4
Treatment & Accountability Court, A Mental Health Court Diversion Program, Program Narrative and FY2009 Budget Detail Worksheet and Narrative. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 23 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE with on‐going case management will be important to maintain in order for the program to be successful in reducing the recidivism rate of mentally disordered persons. The project narrative states that two recent counts of homeless persons in jail who self‐identified a history of mental health care reported an average of 2.5 arrests in 12 months compared to the overall jail average of .9 arrests. For a cost‐avoidance estimate the grant application narrative assumed a jail average length of stay of 50 days at $47 per day for an annual average jail cost to the County of $5,875 per person per year. Using the 50‐person caseload for the 2‐year budget, the cost per case per year is approximately $2,883 for a net savings of $2992 per case per year compared to jail incarceration at 50 days per case per year. Thus, for an annual 50‐person caseload the program could yield a total net savings of approximately $149,600 in one year. It is projected that this specialty court could initially save the county approximately 7 jail beds by providing alternative services. With the projected reductions in recidivism, the savings could rise to 15 beds by 2030. Optional Strategies – In some communities arresting agency staffs are trained to recognize indicators of mental illness and have access to diagnostic specialists with a “crisis intervention facility” that avoids the person even being admitted to jail. For example, Knox County and Memphis, Tennessee both have such a diversion mechanism used by law enforcement officers trained in the Crisis Intervention Team model (CIT) supported by professional diagnostic and treatment planning specialists. The Athens‐Clarke TAC grant narrative indicates that ACCPD officers have had crisis intervention training that would enable them to use the CIT Memphis Model that could avoid jail and court involvement for certain early detected cases if a diagnostic and treatment planning staff are available to the officers. Shelby County (Memphis) pioneered a unique but spreading Public Defender‐focused mental health diversion model program known as “Project Jericho” instead of a dedicated mental health court. Jericho started with demonstration grants in 1998 and is now institutionalized within County government with the Pretrial Services Department. For FY2008‐09 Jericho has a budget of $400,000 considered to be the minimal amount needed for the program to be effective. This budget pays for three (3) full‐time social workers from a provider agency to prepare assessments, develop individualized treatment plans, and provide case management services as approved by the courts of jurisdiction. The County Public Defender staff is trained in practice and procedure to detect likely candidates for diversion then call in assessment staff. Some of the features and accomplishments of Jericho include: • Target population – arrestees with serious mental illness and co‐occurring disorders substance abuse; • Found prosecuting attorneys much more willing to negotiate prompt case disposition of conditional release when the subject has a treatment plan, an assured level of supervision, and thereby a mechanism to assure their return to the justice system in the event of non‐
compliance with their plan; • Instead of designating one court, special dockets or special court resources the county’s criminal justice staff and mental health resources collaborate with all courts; Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 24 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
One Public Defender office staff is designated as a liaison between the justice system and the community mental health providers; 97% of all recommended individual treatment plans have been approved by the courts; No diverted offenders charged with assault have re‐offended with any form of violence; The majority of cases diverted were from felony charges for property crimes with violent or potentially violent charges second most prevalent; All diversions have had severe mental illness and co‐occurring substance abuse; Lifetime arrests averaged 15, however, less than 50% have been re‐arrested in 12 months after diversion; In 20 months from 2/2004 to 10/2006 128 offenders were successfully diverted to treatment; and Diversion participants averaged 99 fewer days in jail 12 months after diversion compared to 12 months prior to release to diversion. Impact and Cost Comparisons – If Shelby County’s mental health diversion program has the same level of diversion in 2008/09 as in the last 20 months it should divert approximately 77 offenders with its $400,000 budget. This would amount to a program cost of approximately $5,195 per case per year, which is almost twice the cost of the Athens‐Clarke proposed TCS model. In the consultant’s experience and as documented in research of “what works” having the judicial system establish a mental health diversion program can be beneficial to both the offender and the criminal justice system by minimizing the time a mentally ill arrestee spends in jail and getting them into treatment. If such diversion can occur at the time of arrest (as in Knox County and Memphis) the result has even less of a cost impact on the criminal justice system by avoiding jail admission and minimizing judicial involvement for some cases. The involvement of a mental health court necessarily results in some degree of jail time for most all cases, which will probably be true for the proposed model in Athens‐Clarke County. The public‐
defender driven model used in Shelby County involves judicial intervention, but not by one dedicated mental health court and instead allowing all criminal courts to each handle diversion of mental health cases. The preceding estimate shows that the cost of the Athens‐Clarke model is projected to cost less on a per case basis compared to the Shelby County model. Once the Athens‐Clarke model has been operative for 12 months a comparison of its qualitative impact and cost per case results could be compared to the Shelby County model as a comparative benchmark. The County may also want to consider increasing the level of pre‐jail admission diversion by the ACCPD by strengthening the level of its CIT capability to include a crisis intervention secure holding and assessment unit in a local hospital. CRIMINAL CASE PROCESSING The American Bar Association (ABA) publishes standards for the amount of time it should take to process cases through the courts for various categories of charges. In 6 categories of pretrial inmates, including all felony, misdemeanants, and probation technical violators, Athens‐Clarke met the ABA standards for processing in an average of 77% of the cases. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 25 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE There is a further discussion of this data and its impact on the current jail population near the end of section 4 of this report. Nuisance Arrests Nuisance arrests can bog down the process of any jail operation. The Athens‐Clarke County Police Department (ACCPD) supplied arrest data for 11 “nuisance” charges that span the past 5 years. Table 10 contains the data supplied by the ACCPD. Table 10 2003 to 2008 "Nuisance" Bookings Days Stay Analysis
Offense
Pedestrian Under the Influence (OCGA 40-6-95)
Loitering and Prowling (OCGA 16-11-36)
Obstructing or Prowling (ACC 3-5-23)
Public Intoxication (OCGA 16-11-41, ACC 3-5-4)
Disorderly Conduct OCGA 16-11-39, ACC 3-5-1)
Underage Possession of Alcohol (OCGA 3-3-23)
Pedestrian in the Roadway (OCGA 40-6-96)
Urinating in Public
Open Container (OCGA 40-6-253, ACC 6-3-12)
Loud Music (OCGA 40-6-14, ACC 3-5-24)
Panhandling (ACC 3-15-1)
Total
Bookings
79
264
16
930
1,038
3,148
22
101
272
67
13
5,950
Median
Days Mode Days
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Source: Athens-Clarke County Police Department , July 2008
The term “nuisance crime” is subjective. Some of the offenses listed can apply to situations that are considered more serious, such as “disorderly conduct” and “obstructing or prowling.” It can be argued, however, that these may be grouped with the other offenses listed as typically falling into the “nuisance” category. The booking information in the table does not include individuals who were cited and released. All of these individuals were booked into the Clarke County Jail, and the charges represent the primary offense for which they were arrested. Of the 11 categories of offenses, only 3 had median stays of 1 day. All others had median stays in jail of zero days. This indicates a negligible impact on jail beds. The primary impact was felt by the intake and release staff in the time it took to process these individuals in and out of the jail. For the same reporting period the Clarke County Jail admitted (booked) 53,675 arrestees into the facility.5 Nuisance arrests totaling 5,950 equals 11% of these admissions. 5
Arrest data supplied by Clarke County Jail administration Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 26 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Administrative officials at the CCJ estimate it takes an average of 18 minutes to book an individual, and an average of 20 minutes to release an individual. Applying these times to the number of nuisance arrests, the jail’s intake and release staff spent an average of 6,800 hours each year processing individuals with these charges in and out of the facility. Assuming an hourly rate of $20 an hour (salary and benefits), this would project to a cost of approximately $136,000 each year. The ACCPD supplied supporting information explaining their policies and practices regarding their response to these types of offenses. For example it is ACCPD practice to take offenders of the following crimes into custody, requiring that they post bond at the Clarke County Jail: • Pedestrian under the Influence (OCGA 40‐6‐95) • Loitering and Prowling (16‐11‐36/3‐5‐23) • Public Intoxication (16‐11‐41/3‐5‐4) • Disorderly Conduct (16‐11‐39/3‐5‐1 – OCGA charge is mandatory fingerprintable offense) • Underage Possession of Alcohol (OCGA 3‐3‐23 – charge is mandatory fingerprintable offense) • Criminal Trespass (OCGA 16‐7‐21 – OCGA charge is mandatory fingerprintable offense) The ACCPD also cites the use and success of the “broken windows” philosophy and its corresponding effect on diminishing violent felony crimes. The full text of their submission is included in the attachments section of this report. Conclusion/Impact The impact of “nuisance arrests” has minimal, if any, impact on bed space needs at the CCJ. The impact is felt by the amount of time it takes to book and then release these individuals, which averages approximately 6,800 hours each year. The salary costs calculate as high as $136,000 annually, assuming it only takes one officer to book and to release an inmate. Additional costs may be felt by other components of the criminal justice system, such as the ACCPD (time and resources taken in the arrests, court preparation and appearances), and the courts and city/county attorney’s in processing the cases. From the standpoint of jail operations administration can examine the booking and release processing times to determine whether they can be streamlined. From a policing standpoint arrest and citation policies and practices can be examined to maximize the use of limited law enforcement resources to determine whether the number of arrests made for these types of offenses is actually warranted. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 27 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 3 Determine Need for New Programs, Costs, and Probable Impacts on the Jail Population UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 3 Determine Need for New Programs, Costs, and Probable Impacts on the Jail Population Present options for new programs and examine benefits to the community as well at the jail population as found to be potentially feasible and suitable in Athens‐Clarke County. The use of existing community resources will be assessed for recommending new or modified jail inmate programs, diversion programs or community‐
based supervision programs. The original needs assessment recommended the development of a diversion center (Community Corrections Center). The report had the following recommendations and justifications: • A 72‐bed Diversion Center should be constructed adjacent to the County Correctional Facility. Initially, it is estimated that approximately 18 beds would be needed for offenders assigned to Work Release and 54 beds for "Alternative Sentencing Programs." This facility should be a low security confinement and reporting center intended to serve both sentenced offenders for "alternative sanctions and supervision" instead of the Jail and for the diversion of Jail inmates deemed suitable for a work release assignment. • Non‐adjudicated offenders whom the Court finds suitable for Pretrial diversion may also be required to report to supervision staff located at the Center, and may or may not require overnight confinement as determined by the Court. • The Courts may also require certain adjudicated offenders to report daily or periodically to supervisory staff at the Center, which could include drug testing as well as counseling interviews/meetings. The County’s pending plan to develop a Diversion/Work Release Center is a positive step in creating a function that would reduce Jail population and could be a more effective tool than Jail incarceration in helping convicted offenders to change their criminal behavior. As it is proposed the concept places primary emphasis on managing adjudicated offenders and programs rather than diverting pretrial detainees. Since pretrial detainees account for about 60% of the ACC Jail population and County sentenced offenders only about 26% it is the consultant’s recommendation that consideration be given to expanding the scope and priorities of the Center to manage pretrial detainees in a community custody status. The inclusion of a “Day Reporting Center” function and the availability of some staff‐secure or low security confinement beds could provide the basis for allowing the Court to release a number of pretrial detainees to community supervision who would otherwise remain in Jail. Having trained staff available to provide “intensive supervision” of at‐risk‐to‐fail non‐violent offenders could result in both a more effective means of offender management as well as one that is much less costly than Jail confinement. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 28 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE A sample of the ACC pretrial detainees should be drawn with appropriate risk and needs background information to enable an estimate to be made of how many detainees may be considered suitable candidates for pretrial release and community custody. DIVERSION CENTER The Athens‐Clarke County Government is planning the construction of a diversion‐work release center in 2009. It is recommended that this facility be a complete jail diversionary center, incorporated various graduated programs including electronic monitoring, day reporting, and work release. The center would contain beds for housing work release inmates during non‐working hours, program space for various educational, vocational, and counseling programs, and administrative space for staff offices, inmate interviews and drug screening. Diversionary programs help reintegrate individuals back into the community following release from jail. It also provides an alternative to jail for many individuals. It combines the benefits of intensive supervision with programming while ensuring public safety. After they are cleared for having no outstanding warrants, a case manager assesses their needs and refers them to services. The program begins while individuals are in jail. A supervision and programming plan is designed and a compliance contract is signed. The plan can include the level of supervision, community service hours, job search, counseling, training, daily schedules, and any court‐ordered conditions. Once released from jail, staff monitors each participant’s activity in the community through random checks at their residence or place of employment based on daily itineraries each individual is required to provide and comply with. The staff also performs random drug testing, job and address verification, and curfew checks. Table 11 Why Not Just Punish? Correctional Alternatives: Pretrial Diversion, Treatment and Re‐entry Economics: 2007 USA Cost per Offender per Year Prison $14,000 ‐ $42,000 ($24,800 avg.) Jail $16,000 ‐ $40,000 Residential Drug Treatment $19,000 Intermediate sanctions facility $15,000 Community/aftercare drug treatment $14,000 Re‐entry/halfway house $7,500 ‐ $13,600 Day reporting with treatment $7,000 Community mental health with treatment $5,500 Community service $3,000 Day reporting $3,000 Electronic monitoring $2,500 ‐ $4,400 Intensive supervised probation $2,500 ‐ $3,600 Standard probation $950 House arrest $450 Note that some program costs are reduced by working offenders paying fees for service and room and board if applicable. Source: American Correctional Association, US Bureau of Justice Statistics and 2004 Tennessee Criminal Justice Summit. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 29 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE The Diversion Center should have a menu of services available on‐site and referral resources off‐site to address the individual’s needs. A case manager should work with a person to build these services into their daily schedule and then work together with the staff to monitor their compliance. The plan is designed to address each individual’s specialized needs. Participants should have access to employment readiness classes, support group meetings, treatment referrals, life skills, financial planning and budgeting, literacy programs, GED/ ABE classes, and stress and anger management programs. The diversionary center should place primary emphasis on assisting the individual in gaining employment. A job development program should assess the job readiness of each person and, if necessary, provide them with an employment skills workshop before they are sent on job interviews. The diversionary center should work to create partnerships with local employers, employment agencies, and vocational technical schools to provide a variety of opportunities to these participants. Inmate Sample The court administrator’s office collected a sample of all inmates housed in the Clarke County Jail on August 3, 2007. The purpose was to apply criteria to determine the approximate number of inmates that may qualify for a work release program and, subsequently, how many jail days and jail beds could be saved if such a diversionary program were in place. Additional information was collected about the inmates in the sample to determine how many should be considered for diversion. Data collected for each inmate includes: • most serious offense • total days in jail • charge disposition • sentence/comments • total bond • jail classification • probation violation • number of bookings in the Clarke County Jail • probation disposition • city of residence • hold for another agency • misdemeanant or felony (most serious • gender charge) • booking date The following are interesting findings from the sample, which contained information for 516 inmates: 10%
Gender • Males accounted for 90% of the inmates in the sample, • Females accounted for 10%. 90%
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 30 ‐ Males
Females
Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Repeat Offenders • The average number of bookings into the CCJ is 11.3. The number of times they have been booked into the Clarke County Jail ranged from 1 to 122. This only considers their bookings into the Clarke County Jail. It does not consider arrests in other jurisdictions. Offense Classification 3%
• Felonies accounted for 67% of the most serious offenses, 30%
• Misdemeanants accounted for 30% of the sample, 67%
• 3% of the sample that were returned for court. Felony
Misdemeanant
Returned for Court
2%
3%
Custody Level • Maximum custody (3%), 35%
• Medium custody (35%), 60%
• Minimum custody (60%), • Data not available (2%). Maximum Medium
Minimum Unknown
Residence 1%
18%
• 81% of the inmates reported living in the Athens area, • 18% reported living in “other” Georgia areas, 81%
• 1% reported living out of state. Athens Area
"Other" Georgia
Out‐of‐State
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 31 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Exclusionary Criteria Eligibility criteria used by the court administrator’s office was discussed and revised during a meeting on May 27, 2008. The meeting was attended by representatives of CGL, the Clarke County Sheriff’s Office, the Athens‐Clarke Attorney’s Office, the Court Administrator’s office, SPLOST, and the Athens‐Clarke Corrections Department. As the diversion center will ideally serve both pretrial and sentenced inmates, the above mentioned group decided to focus on circumstances that would exclude an inmate from the programs. Total Days of 15 or Less: It was determined that an inmate would typically be in the Clarke County Jail for 15 days before becoming eligible for diversion. If an inmate is still in jail after this period of time they are likely unable to post bond, they have been through the initial classification system and criminal history checks. This should be a sufficient amount of time to determine appropriateness for diversion. Hold for Other Agency: If an individual has pending charges or a “hold” placed on them by another jurisdiction, the risk of escape or “walking away” is too great for most diversionary programs. Violent Crimes: All felony violent crimes are excluded from consideration. Misdemeanant charges such as simple assault will be considered depending on bond and circumstance. Burglary/Robbery: All felony charges in this category are excluded from consideration. Petty theft and misdemeanant shoplifting are eligible for consideration. Sex‐Related Crimes: All felony sex‐related crimes are excluded from consideration. Misdemeanant charges, such as public indecency, would be considered based upon the circumstances of the offense. Prison Related: These offenders are state inmates that have been returned for further court proceedings. They are excluded from consideration. Serious Drug Charges: Felony drug charges that typically deal with manufacturing, distribution, trafficking or have high bonds are excluded from consideration. Escape: Escape charges will not be considered. A past escape charge will typically remove an inmate from consideration as well. Miscellaneous: Inmates with high bonds or charges that have the potential for lengthy sentences are excluded from consideration at this time. The exclusionary criteria categories, and the number of inmates in the sample impacted by these criteria, are listed in Table 5. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 32 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 1 Offenses Excluded from Consideration
Number % of
Sample
Total Days of 15 or less 41 7.95%
Hold for Other Agency 89 17.25%
Violent Crimes aggravated assault, aggravated battery, battery (high bond), aggravated staking, stalking, armed robbery, felony battery, cruelty to children/child battery, false imprisonment, vehicular homicide, murder, kidnapping, weapons charges, terrorist threats, violence in confinement, criminal attempt 71 13.76%
Burglary / Robbery entering auto (f), financial ID card fraud (f), FTC fraud (f), forgery (f),
possess burglary tools, shoplifting (f), theft by receiving/taking, robbery by intimidation 46 8.91%
Sex‐Related Crimes aggravated child molestation, aggravated sexual battery, child molestation, public indecency (f) and no bond, rape, sex offender violation 20 3.88%
Prison Related returned for court 16 3.10%
Serious Drug Charges cocaine, manufacturing, possession of a controlled substance (high bond), trafficking 32 6.20%
5 0.97%
Miscellaneous failure to appear (high bond), habitual offender (high bond), criminal conspiracy, obstruction (high bond), exploiting the elderly, no bond, high bond, parole violation, obstruction (1 yr) maximum custody
26 5.04%
Total Excluded
346 67.05%
Escape Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 33 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Eligible Inmate Profile After the exclusionary criteria was applied, there were 170 inmates remaining in the sample. Table 12 compares data from the remaining inmates to those in the entire sample. Table 12 Considered Entire for Diversion Sample Gender Male 88% 90% Female 12% 10% Repeat Offenders Average Bookings into CCJ 14.0 11.3 Offense Classification Felony 45% 67% Misdemeanant 55% 30% Custody Level Maximum 0% 3% Medium 22% 35% Minimum 78% 60% Residence Athens Vicinity 86% 81% Other Georgia Areas 14% 18% Out of State 0% 1% It is not surprising the ratio of male and female inmates considered for diversion are relatively the same as that of the entire sample. Often, programming for female inmates is diminished, or overlooked completely, due to the small number of participants compared to males. It is critical to include an appropriate number of qualified female participants in the diversionary program. The average number of bookings into the Clarke County Jail is higher for the inmates that meet the criteria for consideration of diversion than for the entire inmate sample. This affords the opportunity for a larger impact on the rate of recidivism by working with this group of inmates. There are fewer inmates with felony charges in the “consideration” group. This stands to reason that inmates with the most serious charges would be excluded from the diversion programs. No maximum custody inmates were considered for diversion. Once the program is established, more medium custody inmates may be considered if the agency chooses. Starting the program with a higher portion of “safe” minimum custody inmates is important to refine the process. Once some higher risk inmates are incorporated into the program, the impact on bed needs and recidivism should be even more apparent. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 34 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE It is not surprising that the bulk of inmates to be considered are from the Athens vicinity. Work release and day reporting would be difficult to implement with inmates that do not reside within a practical commuting distance from the diversion center. Projected Usage The remaining inmates were divided into 6 categories: 1‐ Jail “Step Down”: for inmates with good behavior and are willing and able to work, 2‐ Child Support Contempt: for inmates jailed for failure to pay court‐ordered child support, 3‐ Probation “Step Up”: used for technical violators as an alternative to returning to jail, 4‐ Pretrial Release: for inmates in need of additional supervision, 5‐ Non‐Violent Drug and Alcohol Offenses: substance abuse counseling will be a requirement; 6‐ “Other” Participants: to be considered after the other 5 categories have been exhausted The time spent in the Clarke County Jail was analyzed to determine the number of days actually spent in the jail, and how many beds were being used by each category. The jail days‐to‐be‐saved assumes a 15‐
day period of incarceration to determine criminal history, jail classification, and determine eligibility for diversionary programming. Table 13 Estimated Jail Beds and Per Diem Cost Saved Priority
Type
Actual
Inmates
Jail Days
Used
Jail Beds
Used
Jail Days
Saved
Jail Beds
Saved
Per Diem
Saved
($58/Day)
Jail "Step Down"
19
2,848
8
2,563
7
$
148,654
Child Support Contempt
9
1,736
5
1,601
4
$
92,858
Probation Violation
56
5,681
16
4,841
13
$
280,778
Pre-Trial Release
17
2,070
6
1,815
5
$
105,270
Drug & Alcohol Offenders
26
3,556
10
3,166
9
$
183,628
Others
43
3,016
8
2,371
6
$
137,518
Totals
170
18,907
52
16,357
45
$
948,706
Not Eligible
346
75,422
207
-
-
-
Source: CGA calculations using data provided by the Clarke County Jail. May 2008.
Based upon the criteria developed and applied to the inmate sample of August 2007, there were 170 inmates that could have been considered for jail diversion (Table 13). Considering all had been approved, this could have resulted in 16,357 jail days and 45 jail beds saved. At a cost of $58 a day, the county could have seen a “savings” of $948,706. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 35 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Using data provided by the Sheriff’s Office, the estimated cost of housing an inmate in 2007 was factored at $58 per day. Table 14 Estimate of Cost per day of Inmates at Jail for FY07:
FY07 Budget
Inmate Avg Daily Cost per Day
Jail Budget
$7,508,233
420
$49
Sheriff‐Admin for Jail
$617,947
420
$4
420
$5
Government Admin
$776,186
Total $8,902,366
420
$58
Notes:
Notes
‐1
‐2
‐3
(1) ‐ Jail Budget based on FY07 Original Budget. Average daily population for inmates of 420 based on FY07 Sheriff Budget estimate.
(2) ‐ Sheriff's Admin for Jail is based on Jail's budget percent (64%) of total Sheriff's Office Budget multiplied by Sheriff's Office Admin Budget ($971,205).
(3) ‐ Government Admin. For Jail is based on FY05 Cost Allocation study ‐ allocating general government administrative costs to departments and funds ‐ of $681,886 increased by General Fund budget growth in FY06 and FY07.
Source: Clarke County Jail, May 2008. A message that was heard many times was that the judiciary does a good job of keeping people out of jail that don’t need to be there, and the judges would be willing to agree to diversionary programs if they were available and well‐run. An assumption must be made that a percentage of inmates that initially appear to be good candidates for diversion will not qualify once all screening tools have been exhausted. After consulting with County officials, a conservative assumption was agreed upon that 50% of these inmates will not qualify due to their criminal history, institutional behavior, etc…. As displayed in Table 15, with this adjustment, the total number of jail beds saved would be 22.4, and a savings of $474,353 of the jail’s operating budget. Of the inmate sample from August 2007, approximately 85 inmates may be eligible for diversion. Approximately 76 of these would be male, and 9 would be female. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 36 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 15 Jail Beds and Per Diem Saved at 50% Program Eligibility Rate Priority
Type
Actual
Inmates
Jail Days
Used
Jail Beds
Used
Jail Days
Saved
Jail Beds
Saved
Per Diem
Saved
($58/Day)
Jail "Step Down"
19
2,848
8
2,563
7
$
148,654
Child Support Contempt
9
1,736
5
1,601
4
$
92,858
Probation Violation
56
5,681
16
4,841
13
$
280,778
Pre-Trial Release
17
2,070
6
1,815
5
$
105,270
Drug & Alcohol Offenders
26
3,556
10
3,166
9
$
183,628
Others
43
3,016
8
2,371
6
$
137,518
Totals
170
18,907
52
16,357
45
$
948,706
50% Eligible
85.0
9,453.5
25.9
8,178.5
22.4
$
474,353
Source: CGA calculations using data provided by the Clarke County Jail. May 2008.
Given the data collected in the inmate sample, the best option for Athens‐Clarke is a 50‐bed Diversion Center. This will provide maximum flexibility for providing bed space for work release inmates and alternative housing options for sentenced inmates, administrative capabilities for day‐reporting and electronic monitoring programs, and counseling/program capacity to prepare participants to successfully re‐enter the community. Components of a Diversion Center As mentioned at the beginning of this report, a diversion center should contain beds for housing work release offenders during non‐working hours, program space for various educational, vocational, and counseling programs for both residential and non‐residential participants, and administrative space for staff offices, offender interviews and drug screening. A meta‐analysis was conducted by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy for evidence‐based adult corrections programs6. After reviewing studies of 24 intensive supervision: surveillance‐oriented programs, they found 0.0% reduction in recidivism. However, after reviewing 10 studies of intensive supervision, treatment‐oriented programs, they found a 21.9% reduction in recidivism. In other words, just having participants “check‐in” on a scheduled basis has statistically shown no impact on recidivism. This is probably the most inexpensive form of day reporting, and would be much cheaper than confinement in the county jail. But a program that is treatment‐oriented will be more expensive to 6
Evidence‐Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not; Washington State Institute for Public Policy, January 2006 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 37 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE operate in the short term, but has been statistically proven to reduce recidivism which will be much more cost effective over time. Staffing a diversion center must be carefully planned to ensure its effectiveness. The center administrator must work closely with the jail and the courts to ensure the continual identification and screening of potential participants. Proper screening of participant risks and needs is essential for success. A customized treatment program must be developed for each participant. This plan may include, substance abuse counseling, social skills, educational training, vocational training, drug screening, interviewing skills, etc. The administrator must continually interact with community resources to provide needed services pre‐ and post release. Diversion Center Options The Criminal Justice Task Force asked for two diversion center options. The first option would be a basic work release diversion center that provides little or no support programs. The second option would detail a more comprehensive center including counseling and treatment programs for the participants, both residential and non‐residential. Both options would describe the recommended programs, estimate the capital and operating costs, and provide the anticipated benefits, consequences, and cost savings as related to reducing recidivism. The following pages detail the projections that have been made for a 50‐bed Diversion Center. The amount of space required and cost of construction are both higher than preliminary projections made by Athens‐Clarke County Officials. The projections are based upon the review of several recent projects in Georgia and the Florida panhandle. Administration Space The estimated square footage subtotal for administrative space is 4,916 square. The gross circulation & MEP of 35% brings the total amount of administrative space to 6,650. At $175 per square foot for this space, the projected cost for the administrative space will be $1,163,750. Participant Space Just as a jail should be designed to accommodate various classifications and housing needs of the inmate population, a residential diversion center should have similar flexibility. Four 12/13 bed units will provide flexibility for housing various classes of inmates, to include females that must be housed separately. Each of the units would have their own toilet and shower space. The dayroom space will offer 25 square feet per participant. Once a gross circulation and MEP factor of 35% is applied, the total square footage for the participant space should be 7,575 square feet. The cost of $160 per square foot for this space was used, which brings the cost of the participant space to $1,212,000. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 38 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Program Space The first option was for a work release/diversion center with little or no support programs. There is a subtotal of 488 square feet of space in this option that includes a day reporting area, a waiting area, a check‐in counter, and a drug screening restroom. Using a gross circulation & MEP factor of 35%, the total square footage for the program space becomes 675 square feet. At a cost of $170 per square foot, the price for this minimal program space in Option 1 is $114,750. The second option was to provide a more comprehensive center including counseling and treatment programs for the offenders. Spaces for this option include: • Check‐in Counter • Enlarged Waiting • Day Reporting (share program space) • Large Program space (15 ‐ 20 people) • Group Counseling Space(s) (8+10 people) • Medium Counseling (8‐10 people) • Small counseling/attorney (one‐to‐one) • Life Skills Training Room (10‐15 people) • Computer Lab • Job Search Library/Legal Library • Drug screening restroom Using a gross circulation & MEP factor of 35%, the total square footage of the program space in this option is 3,400 square feet. At $170 per square foot, the price for the program space is $578,000. The total building size and cost for Option 1, with little to no support programs will be 14,900 square feet at a projected cost of $4,176,714. The annual operating costs are projected to be $633,810, and the expected revenue generated from participant fees is projected to be $387,813. This is calculated using an average fee of $12.50 per participant, per day. The total building size and cost for Option 2, with a more comprehensive center including counseling and treatment programs for the offenders will be 17,625 square feet at a projected cost of $4,523,263. The annual operating costs are projected to be $713,309, and the expected revenue generated from participant fees is projected to be $620,500. This is calculated using an average fee of $20.00 per participant, per day. The Case Managers assigned to the Diversion Center in Option 2 need to be trained counselors that can develop individualized program components to address their specific needs. Option 2 also includes a Programs Coordinator position that will coordinate both in‐house and community counselors and service providers that will work with the Center’s participants. This position would also work with local businesses to assist in the employment of inmates being considered for work release. This will not only assist with reducing the need for expensive jail beds, but will also provide a service to the local business community in providing, typically, entry level staff to local businesses. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 39 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE A master plan was recently conducted for the Glynn County, Georgia Criminal Justice System, which included a 50‐bed Diversion Center. While it was programmed differently (participants are housed in 1 and 2‐bed rooms) the total project cost was projected to be $6,095,672. This projection was made in 2006 dollars. A third option is to co‐locate the county probation offices in this facility to minimize the need for leased or county‐owned space. A projection of an additional 2,668 square feet would be needed for this option that could be added to either of the options discussed above. If added to Option 2 the total project cost would total approximately $5,184,721. The annual operating costs are projected to be $1,394,197, and the expected revenue generated from participant fees is projected to be $620,500. These projected costs do not include any additional costs for conditions of probation. The estimated revenue for Option 3 is the same as Option 2, as it does not include fees generated by probationers. It has been reported that the revenues generated by probationers may offset, or even exceed, the operational costs Probation. If this is the case, the revenues will significantly increase, and the operational supplement needed would decrease significantly. Square footage and project cost details for these options are included in the appendix of this report. Table 16 Athens‐Clarke Diversion Center Costs
Construction
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Building Size (SF)
14,900 17,625 20,293
Total Project Cost
$ 4,176,714 $ 4,523,263 $ 5,184,721
Capital Cost Increase
$ 346,549 $ 661,458
Operations
Operating Cost
$ 633,810 $ 713,309 $ 713,309
Operating Cost Increase
$ 79,499 $ ‐
Revenue
$ 158,958 $ 179,763 $ 179,763
Operating Balance
$ (474,852) $ (533,546) $ (533,546)
Per Diem (w/out revenue)
$ 20.43 $ 22.99 $ 22.99
Per Diem (with revenue)
$ 15.31 $ 17.20 $ 17.20
Source: CGL projections, August 2008
Assuming the Diversion Center will be operating at a capacity of 85 participants (both residential and non‐residential); the per diem (the cost per participant, per day) is projected to be $20.43 for Option 1. This figure does not account for any revenue that would be generated through participation fees. This amount is just 35% of the current cost of housing an inmate in the jail. When the participant fees are added, the per diem cost for Option 1 drops to just $15.31 per day, which is just 26% of the current cost Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 40 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE of housing an inmate in the jail. While this option is much cheaper than the jail, a diversionary program without programming for the participants does not reduce recidivism. Average fees for Option 1 were calculated at a rate of $12.50 per day for participants of the work release program (28 participants per day), and at a rate of $1.50 per day for community supervision participants (57 participants per day). The jurisdiction should develop a sliding scale for setting the fees each participant will be charged based upon their ability to pay. Current participants of the work release program are charged $12.50 per day, and ACC officials have stated a desire to keep this fee. Officials also expressed a concern for the indigent population that may not be able to very much for participation in a community supervision program. For this option, an average fee of $1.50 per day was used for community supervision participants. Even if these fees were waived entirely, this form of supervision would be much cheaper than housing the individuals in the jail. The per diem for Option 2 (without revenue generated from fees) would be $22.99, which is 40% of the current cost of housing an inmate in the jail. When the fees are added, the per diem cost drops to $17.20 per day, or 30% of the current cost of housing an inmate in the jail. The addition of structured programming can result in as much as a 22% reduction in the participants’ rate of recidivism. Average fees for Option 2 were calculated at a rate of $12.50 per day for participants of the work release program (28 participants per day), and at a rate of $2.50 per day for community supervision participants (57 participants per day). The increase for the community supervision participants is to help offset the increased cost of programming. The per diem for Option 3 mirrors Option 2, as the probationary fees are reported to offset all costs of the Probation program. As discussed earlier in the report the recommended size for the Diversion Center is a 50‐bed facility, with four, 12/13‐bed housing areas. Using the August 2007 inmate sample as a guide, then initial need for Diversion Center beds for the work release program would be approximately 28 beds. This would include 25 beds for males, and 3 beds for females. The minimum housing construction should be two 13‐bed units for males, and one 12‐bed unit for females. Athens‐Clarke County officials have several options for the additional projected space. One option is to only build 3 of the 4 housing units initially, and add the fourth at a later date. The advantage of this option is cheaper construction costs during initial construction. A disadvantage is that the additional housing unit will cost much more to add in the future than to build during the initial construction of the Diversion Center, especially given the relatively small size of the housing units. Another option is to build the shell of the fourth housing section, but not install the beds at this time. The advantage of this option would be the cheaper cost of building the “shell” of the unit now, instead of an additional construction project at a future date. This space could be used for additional storage, administrative or program space until it is needed for housing. A disadvantage of this option is the added expense to building only what is initially needed. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 41 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE A third option is to build the Diversion Center with all 4 housing units. A disadvantage of this option is the cost of building the full facility. However, there are several advantages. Local officials are often (justifiably) apprehensive about new programs that put offenders into the community. The Diversion Center may consider putting 50 of the initial 85 participants in the Diversion Center beds as an intermediate step between jail beds and community supervision. This would utilize all of the beds while “easing” into the community supervision program. Once officials become more comfortable with the system, the additional beds could be used as a different type of “step down” from the jail. Inmates that are determined to be candidates for diversion could be housed in the Center. They may take advantage of the programming, but not be released into the community until they have successfully completed the screening and approval process. This would be an intermediate step in the reentry process, and is a less costly form of housing than a jail bed. Officials must be cautioned to NOT view these additional beds as “overflow” beds to alleviate jail crowding. The type of construction and style of supervision would not be appropriate for inmates that are not at the proper point in their reentry planning. Recidivism and Pre‐release/Reentry Diversion Centers Research has found that inmates released from minimum custody and reentry/pre‐release facilities have a much lower recidivism rate than those released from multi‐security jails and from secure prisons. The higher the security level of the releasing facility the worse the recidivism rates are for released inmates. While numerous recidivism studies have resulted in similar findings a substantial body of recidivism research has been done for several years in Massachusetts for both the state prison system and county corrections systems that have multiple facilities of different custody levels. The MDOC examines recidivism rates for up to three years after release. A number of counties have also made similar studies primarily for up to one year after release. The following graphs show comparable results that include inmates being released from both the MDOC sentenced facilities and from the Essex County MA local adult detention facilities. Figure Recidivism Rates of MA DOC 2001 and 2002 Released Inmates by Releasing Facility Figure Recidivism from Essex County MA 2006 Releases 58%
50%
60%
40%
50%
Recidivism Rate
Recidivism Rate
60%
30%
20%
10%
Percent 2001
0%
Percent 2002
39%
40%
30%
2006 Percentage
20%
10%
3%
0%
Middleton
LCAC
WIT
Releasing Facility
Source: One Year Recidivism 2006. Essex County, MA Sheriff’s Department. Security Level of Releasing Facility
Source: MDOC Research and Planning Division, June 2008. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 42 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE The Massachusetts studies found a 59% recidivism rate for inmate released directly from the DOC’s maximum security prisons and 58% for inmates released directly from the Essex County Jail. For the DOC inmates released from minimum security the rate dropped to approximately 37% and for releases from three different types of pre‐release/reentry facilities it dropped to 27%. For the Essex County system men released from the county’s minimum security LCAC Reentry Center reduced to 39% and women released from the female WIT Diversion/Reentry Center had only a 3% failure rate. As the Athens‐Clarke County Diversion Center will focus on supervising and treating offenders who have either been diverted away from jail incarceration or “stepped down” from the jail after a portion of their sentence, it should achieve similar “directional” results as the noted research examples. Tracking recidivism rates for all offenders released from the proposed Diversion Center versus those released from the County Jail should be expected to have similar trend results as the above examples. Such benchmarks should prove to be useful as program justification and for increasing the confidence of the Judiciary to expand its reliance on the Diversion Center after success is demonstrated. Other Evidence‐Based Diversion and Alternative Sanctions Success Examples A substantial amount of applied research over the past decade has provided a strong base of evidence that certain kinds of community‐based offender supervision and treatment programs are effective and more cost efficient than jail incarceration, especially in reducing recidivism. The landmark assessment of “What Works” by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (noted at the beginning of this Task report) evaluated 291 programs considered mature and rigorous enough to provide reliable results. A few select success examples from that study that are relevant to the course being considered by Athens‐
Clarke County included: • Drug courts were found to have a 10.7% recidivism reduction rate • Intensive supervision probation = 21.9% reduction • Vocational education programs = 12.6% reduction • Cognitive behavioral restructuring for sex offenders on probation = 31.2% reduction • Community‐based work and education programs generally successful Pretrial Diversion Programs – The National Institute of Corrections published a study by the Pretrial Justice Institute that conducted a multi‐year DOJ funded evaluation of pretrial release and supervision programs in numerous urban locations throughout the U.S. Two counties very different in size and location, Shelby County TN and Monroe County NY reported similar results in their pretrial diversion programs with program participants having 35% to 39% lower recidivism rates than control groups not involved in their programs. In 2008 CGL recently completed a Jail Master Plan for Shelby County TN which included evaluations of the County’s Pretrial Services Department and other local diversion programs. In addition to pretrial services the Department also operates the County probation program; a Day Reporting Center, an Intensive Supervision program and prepares all evaluations and ROR release recommendation for the Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 43 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE courts to consider diversion from jail to community custody. The Department’s various programs range from $10 to $40 per day per offender supervised compared to the County’s current jail operating cost of approximately $87 per inmate per day. Also, the County’s successful mental health diversion program that started in 2002 with a federal grant was recently merged with Pretrial Services into the County’s annual budget and Community Services Division. Courts have approved 97% of the recommended individualized treatment plans for diversion provided by the team centered on public defenders with an approximate $400,000 annual budget that includes three FTE social workers from contract provider agencies that develop the assessments and treatment plans. District Attorney’s Jail Screening – Some jurisdictions have implemented collaborative efforts between the prosecutor’s office and the jail. In these programs the district attorney’s office assigns staff to the jail to review cases immediately after arrest to determine the viability of the charges for prosecution, sometimes known as “direct filing.” Charges can be approved “as is”, amended, or rejected for prosecution. These programs can cause friction between arresting agencies and the prosecutor’s office, and require open lines of communication and cooperation between the agencies to remain viable. In Shelby County, TN the District Attorney General’s Office has operated a Jail Screening program at the County Jail since 2002. This program was designed to: (1) confirm the intent to prosecute an arrestee or divert them from jail in cases where there is insufficient evidence or proof; and (2) to assure that offenders are charged properly. Two assistant DA’s are stationed at the Jail to review arrestee cases prior to booking to decide if the case will proceed. If the ADA dismisses the case, the arrestee is not booked into the Jail. For 2006 the Screening Unit had the following results: Citations would normally be sent to court even though they are not arrested. The 2006 Annual Report of the District Attorney General indicates that a total of 32,371 criminal cases consisting of 10,035 Jail cases and 22,336 citations (booked only but not incarcerated) were screened that year with the result shown in figure 3.7 The staff’s total arrest decline rate of 1% yielded approximately 324 declined arrests in 2006 when they screened only 19% of all jail cases. A 1% decline rate means that approximately 100 jail detainees were released via this program in 2006 from the 10,035 Jail cases screened. If the same 1% decline rate could have been achieved for screening the total Jail admissions count for 2006, as many as 530 Jail detainees may have been released instead of just 100. 7
District Attorney General’s 2006 Annual Report; and Shelby County Sheriff’s Office, April 2008. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 44 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Figure 3 2006 Results from 32,371 Offender Cases Screened
13%
3% 1%
17%
Arrests Declined
Arrests with Charges Altered
Citations Approved
Arrests Approved
66%
Citations Declined
The Athens‐Clarke criminal justice system could benefit from implementing a District Attorney’s Jail Screening Unit. With a much smaller jurisdiction size than Shelby County the equivalent of 1.5 FTE assistant district attorneys could be sufficient initially. The benefits would not only be recognized by the jail, but also the courts could experience a reduced average jail case processing time, especially for those arrestees who are released on the same day as their jail admission. Programs and Resources Limited programming is offered to inmates in the Clarke County Jail. The programming areas consist of religious activities, GED classes and educational activities, and addiction recovery and 12‐step meetings. There is a request form inmates can complete to request a social worker. They may also make a request for information and/or participation in the following programs: MAKE A CHANGE (M.A.C.) PROJECT: A 7 week program available to inmates with multiple incarcerations who want to make a change. Seven weeks of classes will address: 1. Needs assessment; 2. Setting goals; 3. Addiction; 4. Education; 5. Legal compliance; 6. The T.O.P.P.S.T.E.P. job search program, and 7. Reentry planning. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 45 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE ATHENS JUSTICE PROJECT: Legal representation and social services – “AJP strives to help low‐
income men and women who are charged with crimes in their commitment to lead crime‐free lives as self‐supporting, productive citizens.” MOTHERS IN JAIL PROGRAM (UGA Law School Civil Clinics) answers legal questions regarding inmates with children. The Programs Division in the jail also provides lists of Athens area agencies, shelters, recovery programs for both men and women. Community Resources The Athens‐Clarke area appears to have a number of community resources available to citizens in the area. This section will profile two of the many local organizations whose purpose is to provide assistance at low or no cost. Community Connection of Northeast Georgia is a non‐profit, multi‐program human service agency was established in 1983 as an information and referral service. Their mission is “to nurture, develop, and maintain information and systems which empower individuals and communities to access needed resources and services”. Services offered include: Aging Services The Northeast Georgia Area Agency on Aging (AAA) has established a free telephone information service to better meet the needs of the growing senior population. Disability Resources The 211 Center maintains relationships with several organizations in the community that provide services to people with disabilities. Information and Referral Specialists provide callers with referrals to dozens of agencies with specialized services for people with disabilities including health care, recreation, advocacy, equipment, education, and support groups. The Georgia Advocacy Office is a non‐profit that can help people with disabilities with issues such as housing and employment discrimination, financial entitlements, abuse and neglect, and inappropriate institutionalization. Employment Resources Community Connection has compiled a list of links to local employment listings on their website including: Athens Banner‐Herald Classifieds Clarke County Unified Government Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 46 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Georgia Department of Labor University of Georgia Job Vacancies Clarke County School District Oconee County School District St. Mary's Health Care System Athens Regional Medical Center Careers with the State of Georgia Referrals to job training and preparation resources are also offered. Volunteer Opportunities Volunteer 211, a program of Community Connection, offers resources and referrals for citizens wishing to volunteer in the community, such as listings of upcoming special projects and a catalog of agencies that take volunteers regularly. In addition, such agencies can access the Volunteer 211 website for tips on recruiting, training, and keeping volunteers. Volunteer Opportunity Categories • Adult Mentoring • Aging Matters • Arts / Entertainment / Recreation • Civic • Crisis / Intervention Lines • Disabilities • Food and Shelter • Health Care • Organizational Support • Plants and Animals • Social Services • Youth Mentoring While all of the services provided are valuable community resources, this appears to be primarily a referral agency, guiding individuals to available services as opposed to providing the services themselves. Jail officials may find it beneficial to access many of these resources to provide needed training, counseling and re‐entry planning for incarcerated individuals; particularly job training and preparation resources. Also helpful would be connecting offenders with volunteer agencies to provide assistance with housing, food, medical, and social services. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 47 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE The Athens Justice Project (AJP) is a non‐profit agency that first opened their office in 2001. Their mission is to break the cycle of crime and poverty by providing legal representation, counseling, and employment opportunities to criminal offenders. Representatives of AJP are typically in the jail at least twice each week interviewing and counseling inmates. They provide inmates with counseling for addictive conditions, re‐entry services, and employment enhancement. The AJP also offers an 8‐week training program with instruction on enhancing and developing job skills, building a resume, obtaining tax credits, and provides mentoring services for 6 months. This 8‐week class is provided once an inmate has either bonded out of jail, or has completed their sentence. While some counseling takes place in the jail, counselors have provided information during the “Make a Change (MAC) program, the majority is done after the inmate has been released. Representatives of AJP indicate they would be willing to offer additional training and counseling to incarcerated inmates if jail officials were interested. This could be a valuable enhancement to the programming currently offered at the jail. The cost to the CCJ for these additional services, if any, would be negotiated with the Athens Justice Project. The long‐range benefits of productive citizens that would reoffend less frequently would more than offset the cost of providing the additional services. Portions of the 8‐week training program currently offered by AJP, if not the entire program, could be offered to offenders at the proposed Diversion Center. Partial listings of other community resources that may be of benefit to offenders either while incarcerated or post‐release are illustrated in Table 17. Table 17 Athens‐Clarke Community Resource Agencies Agency Purpose Advantage Behavioral Health Systems Athens Area Alcoholics Anonymous Athens Nurses Clinic Food Bank of Northeast Georgia Georgia Fatherhood Program Georgia Legal Services Georgia Regional Narcotics Anonymous Penfield Christian Home Carter Goble Associates, Inc. a publicly‐funded provider of behavioral health, developmental disability and addictive disease services for Barrow, Clarke, Elbert, Greene, Jackson, Madison, Morgan, Oconee, Oglethorpe, and Walton counties. provides counseling and planning for individuals with alcohol dependency
a non‐profit clinic providing free health care to the poor, the uninsured and the underinsured. works toward ending hunger as part of an overall community effort to alleviate poverty in the community. provides education, training, and job placement for non‐custodial parents with court‐ordered child support. provide access to justice and opportunities out of poverty for Georgians with low‐incomes. provides counseling and planning for individuals with drug dependencies.
a Christ‐centered ministry for reclaiming the lives of adult men suffering from addiction to drugs and alcohol. ‐ 48 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Conclusion/Impact There appears to be a number of community resource agencies in the area that could be of benefit to the inmates in the CCJ, either pre or post release. The Community Connection of Northeast Georgia is primarily a referral agency, guiding individuals to available services as opposed to providing the services themselves. Jail officials may find it beneficial to access many of these resources to provide needed training, counseling and re‐entry planning for incarcerated individuals; particularly job training and preparation resources. While this may be difficult to provide in the jail setting, these services would be extremely beneficial if offered in a diversionary setting. It would also be helpful to connect offenders with volunteer agencies to provide assistance with housing, food, medical, and social services. The Athens Justice Project currently offers limited counseling to inmates that are currently incarcerated. The majority of their training (life skills and substance abuse) takes place once an inmate has been discharged from the jail. AJP officials have indicated a willingness to offer a modified version of their 8‐
week to inmates while still incarcerated. Jail officials have also indicated a willingness to such an option for additional services and are encouraged to explore this option. These services would also be well‐
suited to be used in a diversionary setting where there is a more normalized setting and greater access to the offenders. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 49 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 4 Update the 2003 Jail Needs Projections UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 4 Update the 2003 Jail Needs Projections This draft provides an update of the trends analysis and resulting Jail bed needs projections originally developed in 2001 as part of the Criminal Justice System Needs Assessment completed by CGL between 2001 and 2003. The scope of the projections for this Update is limited to the Jail capacity needs. Measurable trend changes between 2001 and 2006 or 2007 are noted. County Population The general population of Clarke County has steadily increased over the last 10 years from 98,104 in 1997 to 114,063 in 2007 with a slight growth rate increase between 2001 and 2007 compared to 1997 to 2001. Table 18 Clarke County Population Estimates
1997
1998
County Population
98,104 98,939
Source: US Census Bureau, April 2008
1999
100,173
2000
101,489
2001
103,516
2002
104,344
2003
105,989
2004
109,500
2005
109,319
•
•
2007
114,063
•
2006
111,692
In 2001 when the Needs Assessment was conducted the reported County census for 2000 was 101,489 compared to the 2007 U.S. Census Bureau record of 114,063. By 2007 County population increased by 16.3% from 1997, or 1.52% annually. Between 2001 and 2007 the population increased by 10.2% since 2001, or 1.63% annually thus showing a slight increased rate of overall growth. Table 19 Clarke County Projected County Population
2010
2015
2020
2028
2030
Projected Pop. (High)
121,167
128,862
136,554
148,861
151,937
Projected Pop. (Med)
Projected Pop. (Low)
114,346
111,110
120,774
116,530
127,203
122,240
137,753
132,057
140,060
133,722
Source: Athens-Clarke County Planning Dept., 2005
•
The 2007 county population of 114,063 already approaches the “moderate” 2010 projection by the Athens‐Clarke County Planning Department and exceeds the “low” projection by about 3,000. Reported Crime Reported Part I offenses in Clarke County have declined steadily and significantly since 1998 through 2006. Part I offenses include four violent offenses (murder, rape, robbery, and assault) and three Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 50 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE property offenses (burglary, larceny, and vehicle theft). Larcenies tend to make up the vast majority of Part I offenses, while violent offenses are a small fraction of the total Part I offenses. Table 20 Clarke County Part I Offenses
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
515
470
424
466
445
397
474
399
382
Murder
4
8
5
8
7
9
5
6
5
Rape
40
51
37
27
55
53
52
45
60
Robbery
176
163
161
160
158
145
167
151
127
Assault
295
248
221
271
225
190
250
197
190
7,494
6,855
7,035
7,003
6,706
6,692
6,393
6,597
6,152
Burglary
1,166
1,221
1,112
1,063
1,057
1,106
1,236
1,165
1,155
Larceny
5,805
5,235
5,547
5,551
5,241
5,179
4,854
5,027
4,622
Violent Offenses
Property Offenses
Vehicle Theft
Total Part I
523
399
376
389
408
407
303
405
375
8,009
7,325
7,459
7,469
7,151
7,089
6,867
6,996
6,534
Source: Georgia Bureau of investigation Crime Statistics
•
•
Overall Part I crime has decreased by 12.5% since 2001; violent offenses decreased by 18.03%, property offenses decreased by 12.15%. Annually, Part I offenses have declined by an average of 2.5% each year since 1998. Violent offenses have decreased by 3.67% annually, while property offenses have decreased by 2.44% annually. Figure 2 illustrates the downward trend since 2001. Figure 4 Clarke County Historical Part I Offenses
8,500
8,000
7,500
7,000
Total Part I
6,500
6,000
5,500
5,000
1998
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. 1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
‐ 51 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Crime Rate The crime rate of Clarke County per capita, being a function of increasing County population and decreasing Part I offenses, has declined significantly since 1998 as shown in Table 21. Table 21 Clarke County Crime Rate
County Population1
Part I Crimes2
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
98,939
100,173
101,489
103,516
104,344
105,989
109,500
109,319
111,692
7,459
73.50
7,469
72.15
7,151
68.53
7,089
66.88
6,867
62.71
6,996
64.00
6,534
58.50
8,009
7,325
Crime Rate
80.95
73.12
Sources: 1 US Census Bureau, April 2008
2
Georgia Bureau of investigation Crime Statistics
Crime Rate expressed as number of offenses per 1,000 county residents
•
The crime rate in 2006 was 58.5 offenses per 1,000 county residents, an 18.9% decrease from the rate of 72.15 in 2001. From 1998 to 2006, the crime rate decreased by 22.45 offenses per 1,000 residents, a 27.7% decline. •
County Jail Average Daily Population The average daily population (ADP) of a jail denotes the average number of inmates housed by a facility in one day or in some cases over a month depending on the Jail’s method of recording counts. Despite a decrease in county Part I crime, the ADP for the Clarke County Jail has followed an increasing trend for the past decade. Shaded boxes in Table 4 denote the highest peak months in each year, which are used to calculate an average peaking factor for each year shown as the last row in the table. This factor is an important component for developing future bed capacity need projections that are calibrated to avoid frequent periodic crowding due to normal peaks of spikes throughout the year. Table 22 summarizes the ADP by month by year from 1996 through 2007 and provides ADP peaking computations for each year. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 52 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 22 Clarke County Jail Historical Average Daily Population & Peaking
1996
273
1997
285
February
270
281
357
367
380
318
390
346
March
281
269
342
364
356
348
388
358
April
274
272
341
337
407
364
426
373
January
1998
306
1999
317
2000
334
2001
333
2003
316
2004
398
2005
393
2006
437
2007
402
407
420
435
412
419
438
437
411
435
455
438
407
439
May
239
319
321
316
397
366
447
406
414
422
433
June
223
315
344
344
403
377
385
427
447
403
429
468
July
209
295
342
343
405
395
364
424
425
405
436
469
August
227
336
307
351
376
399
373
438
382
431
422
511
September
October
258
294
328
304
322
317
359
368
339
378
415
420
361
352
441
406
397
418
444
433
419
401
518
493
November
December
277
287
307
330
338
320
342
334
422
362
428
421
348
362
419
409
413
402
449
420
412
384
446
392
259.3
303.4
329.8
345.2
379.9
382.0
377.9
396.9
413.1
426.1
423.6
447.3
287.3
10.80%
331.3
9.20%
347.7
5.43%
366.3
6.13%
411.3
8.27%
423.0
10.73%
421.0
11.40%
435.3
9.68%
435.7
5.47%
449.3
5.46%
437.5
3.29%
507.3
13.41%
Average
3-month High
Peaking
Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (1996-2004)
Average Peaking
Clarke County Jail Daily Watch Commander Report (2005-2007)
8.27%
•
•
•
2002
339
Annual ADP has increased by 72.5% since 1996, an increase of 188 inmates Annual ADP has increased by 17.1% since 2001, an increase of 65 inmates ADP growth occurred at a much more accelerated rate from 1996 to 2001 (8.1% annually) than from 2001 to 2007 (2.7% annually) The “peaking factor” is calculated for each year normally over at least a 10‐year term. As noted above the average of the three highest monthly ADPs for the year are used to calculate the difference between that “three‐month high” and the average for the year as a whole. • Since 1996, Clarke County Jail has experienced peaking factors ranging from 3.29% (2006) to 13.41% (2007) • The average peaking from 1996 to 2007 is 8.27%. That is to say that in a given year, Clarke County Jail would expect to periodically hold approximately 8.27% more inmates than average. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 53 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Figure 5 Clarke County Jail Average Daily Population
600
500
400
300
Annual ADP
Monthly ADP
200
100
0
Jan-96 Jan-97 Jan-98 Jan-99 Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07
Incarceration Rate Incarceration rate (IR) is a calculation of the number of inmates incarcerated in jail per 1,000 county residents. County population and jail ADP have both been following increasing trends, but the growth of jail ADP has outpaced general population growth, leading to a higher incarceration rate. Table 23 Clarke County Population Estimates & Incarceration Rate
County Population1
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
98,104
98,939
100,173
101,489
103,516
104,344
105,989
109,500
109,319
111,692
114,063
345.2
3.45
379.9
3.74
382.0
3.69
377.9
3.62
396.9
3.74
413.1
3.77
426.1
3.90
423.6
3.79
447.3
3.92
Jail ADP2
303.4
329.8
Incarceration Rate
3.09
3.33
Sources: 1 US Census Bureau, April 2008
2
Georgia Department of Community Affairs (1996-2004)
Clarke County Jail Daily Watch Commander Report (2005-2007)
Carter Goble Associates, April 2008
•
Since 1997, jail ADP has grown by 47.4% while county population has only grown by 16.3%, causing the rate of incarceration to increase. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 54 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE •
The most significant growth in IR occurred from 1997 to 2000, when IR increased from 3.09 to 3.74 over three years. From 2001 onward, IR has grown more slowly and actually decreased in 2002 and 2006. •
Incarceration Rate Projection Model – A projection of the effect of growing incarceration rate on county jail population was derived by using county population projections by the Athens‐Clarke County Planning Department. Since 2003, the county IR has increased at a rate of 1.16% annually. An unchecked continuation of this growth is the basis for the following projection. Table 24 Clarke County Jail Population Projection
(Incarceration Rate Model)
Projected County Pop.
2010
2015
2020
2028
2030
121,167
128,862
136,554
148,861
151,937
4.06
492
4.30
554
4.56
622
5.00
744
5.11
777
Projected IR
Projected Jail ADP
Source: Carter Goble Associates, July 2008
Based on "high" county population forecast by ACC Planning Dept
and incarceration rate growth of 1.16% annually
•
•
The 2010 ADP projected by this model has already been exceeded in three months of 2007. This model uses a simple formula to calculate a ratio of county population to IR, and lacks the performance indicators of more sophisticated statistical models to measure the strength of the projection. Therefore, it is not recommended that this model be used as a basis for future planning. •
County Jail Admissions Jail bookings, or admissions (ADM), denote the number of inmates who enter the jail regardless of the length of their stay. Table 25 Clarke County Annual Admissions
Admissions
1999
2000
2001
…
2005
2006
2007
10,151
9,806
9,726
…
10,377
10,838
12,603
Source: Clarke County Jail Daily Watch Commander Report
•
•
•
From 1999 to 2001, bookings into Clarke County Jail decreased by 4.2%. Since 2001, bookings have increased by 29.6%, peaking at 12,603 annual admissions on 2007. Bookings increased significantly in the 2005‐2007 period, experiencing an average annual growth of 10.2%. Admissions grew by 16.3% from 2006 to 2007 alone. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 55 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Average Length of Stay Average length of stay (ALOS) is a calculated number that estimates the average number of days spent in the jail by each inmate. It is calculated by the formula: ALOS = (Annual ADP x 365) / Annual ADM Table 26 Clarke County Average Length of Stay
1999
2000
2001
…
2005
2006
2007
ADP
345.2
379.9
382.0
…
426.1
423.6
447.3
ADM
ALOS
10,151
12.41
9,806
14.14
9,726
14.34
…
…
10,377
14.99
10,838
14.27
12,603
12.96
Source: Clarke County Jail Daily Watch Commander Report
•
•
•
ALOS has ranged from 12.41 days (1999) to 14.99 days (2005). Overall, ALOS has not significantly changed since 2001, despite small fluctuations. The lack of significant change in ALOS, couple with increasingly high ADP since 2001, indicates that the growth in ADP is being driven by more inmates being booked into the system. Changes in ALOS have a direct impact on the population of a jail, given the same number of bookings. Seemingly small reductions or increases the length of time spent by inmates in a jail can have significant effect on the total jail population. Table 27 ALOS
Impact of ALOS on ADP
2005
2006
2007
ADM
10,377
10,838
12,603
17.00
483
505
587
16.00
455
475
552
15.00
426
445
518
14.99
426
445
517
14.27
406
424
493
14.00
398
416
483
13.00
370
386
449
12.96
368
385
447
12.00
341
356
414
11.00
10.00
313
284
327
297
380
345
Source: Carter Goble Associates, using data
from Clarke County Jail Daily Watch
Commander Reports
•
•
In 2007, a three day reduction of ALOS to 10 days would have reduced the ADP by over 100 inmates, a 30% decrease. Inversely, if ALOS had been three days higher, at 16 days, ADP would have grown by 105 inmates, a 23.5% increase. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 56 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Inmates by Sentence Status Inmates in Clarke County Jail fall under one of three sentencing statuses: pretrial, sentenced to county jail, or sentenced to state incarceration. The majority of inmates in the jail are awaiting trial. Of the sentenced inmates, most are sentenced to county jail while a smaller number are state sentenced. Table 28 Clarke County Inmate Sentencing Status
County Sentenced
State Sentenced
Year
#
Pre-Trial
%
#
%
#
%
1997
179.0
59.1%
66.0
21.8%
58.0
19.1%
1998
182.0
55.2%
92.0
27.9%
56.0
17.0%
1999
202.0
58.6%
115.0
33.3%
28.0
8.1%
2000
216.0
57.1%
137.0
36.2%
25.0
6.6%
2001
267.0
69.9%
76.0
19.9%
39.0
10.2%
2002
242.5
63.8%
91.4
24.1%
46.0
12.1%
2003
228.7
58.0%
110.2
28.0%
55.3
14.0%
2004
224.8
54.6%
122.5
29.7%
64.6
15.7%
2005
262.3
62.9%
108.1
25.9%
46.3
11.1%
2006
2007
266.3
220.6
64.5%
58.4%
94.1
107.5
22.8%
28.5%
52.8
49.3
12.8%
13.1%
Avg.
240.8
60.4%
105.6
26.5%
52.4
13.1%
Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs
•
•
In 2007, pretrial inmates comprised 58% of the total, county sentenced 29%, and state sentenced 13%. These breakdowns are all within 2% of the overall average from 1997‐2007. The abnormally high (70%) pretrial population of 2001 proved to be an anomaly when compared with the entire period from 1997 to 2007. Status Quo Conditions Jail Population Projection A “status quo projection” is intended to assume that the trends, policies and the criminal justice system’s response to crime will follow the patterns of the historic data and trends for the past 10 years. A similar projection was made in the 2001 Needs Assessment. Also, an “alternative future projection” was made based on the assumption that certain “interventions” or systemic changes would be made in Clarke County’s criminal process to reduce reliance on jail for pretrial detainees. Proposals for diversion of both pretrial and locally sentenced offenders were developed and some were implemented. Based on early successful results with some diversion it was agreed that the “reduced” projection would be used for planning a new jail. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 57 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE To develop a valid similar kind of alternative reduced projection today will require approval by the advisory committee and agreement by the County and criminal justice officials to fully implement certain systemic changes in criminal process for pretrial detainees to be diverted to community custody and supervision or treatment as applicable rather than jail detention. Without such affirmative action a reduced projection would not be realistic to follow. New Status Quo Projections – A new “status quo projection” of future jail population was made by using three different models that applied monthly historical ADP data from 1996 to 2007. Each model is analyzed by a performance indicator called “R‐square” that measures the strength of correlation or “fit” of the model to the historic time series data. The closer R‐square is to one, the better the fit. The three models produced a range of projected ADP values that were averaged together in order to create a more well‐rounded projection of anticipated ADP. The models used are as follows: • Model 1: linear regression. R‐square = 0.742 • Model 2: exponential smoothing (linear trend, multiplicative seasonality). R‐square = 0.851 • Model 3: ARIMA. R‐square = 0.861 Table 29 Comparison of ADP Forecast Models
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Model 1: Linear Regression
R-square = 0.742
499.4
573.3
647.2
721.1
795.0
Model 2: Exponential Smoothing
R-square = 0.851
548.6
608.4
668.2
728.0
787.8
Model 3: ARIMA
R-Square = 0.861
549.9
629.5
709.1
788.7
868.3
Recommended Forecast
Average of Models 1-3
532.6
603.7
674.8
746.0
817.1
Source: Carter Goble Associates, April 2008
•
•
•
By 2030, the low projection (Model 2) projects 788 inmates. The medium projection (Model 1) projects 795 inmates. The high projection (Model 3) projects 817 inmates. When averaged to form a recommended projection, 533 inmates are projected for 2010, 675 inmates are projected for 2020, and 817 are projected for 2030. The projections made in 2001 by three similar models resulted in an ADP of 560 by 2006 versus an actual result of 424. •
•
Clearly the trend changes from 2001 to 2007 have significantly reduced the projected ADP, which will result in a commensurate reduction in the calculated bed capacity need. In 2001 the “alternative future” reduced ADP projection based on systemic changes and diversion program recommendations agreed to included a 25% cumulative reduction for all proposed interventions. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 58 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 30 Projection Years 2006 2011/ 2010 2016/ 2015 2021/ 2020 2025 2001 Status Quo ADP Projection 570
662
742
817
n.a.
2001 Reduced ADP Projection 427
496
556
612
n.a.
2008 Status Quo ADP Projection n.a. 533 604 675 746 Status Quo Projected Bed Need The operational bed capacity need is derived by augmenting the ADP projection by the historical peaking factor (8.27% from 1996‐2007) to avoid crowding by periodic peaks throughout the year. Secondly, a classification factor of 5% is added to allow for custody group separations of inmates into discrete housing units and for temporary relocation during limited down time for maintenance of cells or dorm units. Table 31 provides the conversion of the projected ADP to operational bed capacity need. Table 31 Forecasted Bed Need
Forecasted ADP
Peaking @ 8.27%
Classification @ 5%
Total Bed Need
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
532.6
603.7
674.8
746.0
817.1
44
50
56
62
68
27
30
34
37
41
603
684
764
845
926
Source: Carter Goble Associates, April 2008
•
After applying the conversion factors, an operational bed need of 603 results for 2010 and in 2020 a total of 764 beds are needed; growing to 926 beds by 2030. This projection of bed needs is lower than the projection made in the 2001 Needs Assessment because the growth of ADP slowed down significantly from 2001 onward when compared to the growth experienced from 1996 to 2001. The previous projection yielded an ADP of 560 in 2006, but historically the ADP never exceeded 438 in any month of that year. The updated projection also used nearly twice as many monthly data points to derive its projection. Bed Distribution by Sentencing Status By applying the historical breakdown of pretrial and sentenced inmates to the overall estimated bed need, an estimation of beds required by inmates of each status can be reached. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 59 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 32 Bed Distribution by Sentencing Status
2010
2015
2020
2025
Total Bed Need
603
684
764
845
926
Pre-trial Inmates @ 60%
362
410
459
507
555
Inmates Sentenced to County @ 27%
Inmates Sentenced to State @ 13%
163
78
185
89
206
99
228
110
250
120
Source: Carter Goble Associates, April 2008
•
•
•
2030
Historically, pretrial inmates have made up 60% of the total population, mandating that 362 beds be allocated in 2010. County sentenced inmates have made up 27% of the population, requiring 163 beds in 2010 State sentenced inmates, comprising only 13% of the population, will require 78 beds in 2010. Recommended Alternative Future Bed Need Projection The Basis for a Reduced Projection – Athens‐Clarke County is currently proposing to “change the status quo” of offender management options available to law enforcement and the court with the construction of a diversion center. The diversion center will expand the scope and capacity of options available for both sentenced and pretrial offenders away from jail detention. Consequently, an alternative future bed need projection that accounts for this change seems more logical than simply relying on the preceding status quo projection. In the original 2001 Needs Assessment an “adjusted” or alternative future bed need projection was made based on estimated jail population reductions from certain “interventions” or systemic changes in criminal process that were considered viable at that time. The four (4) interventions recommended for implementation in 2001/02 included: (1) Reducing the average length of stay of pretrial detainees to meet American Bar Association case completion time standards estimated a 13% jail ADP reduction potential; (2) Reducing the average length of stay for probation technical violators to be 45 days or less estimated a 4% reduction potential; (3) Reducing jail population by Implementing a pretrial release program for detainees who unable to secure a bonded release estimated a 4% reduction potential; and (4) Reducing jail population by implementing a diversion center focused on county‐sentenced inmates with a work release program estimated a 4% reduction potential. Fully implementing all four interventions earlier in this decade was thus estimated to have the potential for an aggregate reduction of approximately 25% of the jail ADP (total of pretrial and sentenced). Progress was made by the courts in reducing the case completion times during the beginning of the first Needs Assessment study in 2001 and 2002, which got some detainees out of jail more quickly thus freeing up beds for others. However, the County has not yet implemented #3 above, a pretrial release program or #4 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 60 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE a diversion center, although it began planning and budgeting to build a diversion center prior to this update of the Needs Assessment. Also, as shown in the following assessment it appears that some of the gains made in shortening pretrial case processing time in 2001 and 2002 have been lost more recently. 2008 Trends – In order to develop an objective basis for a similar but current “alternative future projection” the Sheriff’s staff recorded a 2‐day sample from the total jail population of 100% of all pretrial detainees on June 5 (291 inmates) and June 13, 2008 (324 inmates) as was done for the 2001 study. Table 24 shows the results of the sample for sub‐counts of the total number of pretrial detainees by an unduplicated count for each of six categories of detention and by a 7‐part breakdown of the number of days they had been in jail at that time as follows. Table 33 Potential Jail ADP Reduction Due to Meeting ABA Processing Time Standards Failure to
Appear Bench
Days In Jail Pretrial Felony Warrant Felony
0-3
32
0
4 - 30
96
5
31 - 60
61
0
61 - 90
45
0
91 - 120
37
0
121 - 180
25
2
181+
80
0
Contempt of
Court Felony
2
17
8
11
7
5
6
Pretrial
Misdmeanor
18
35
5
3
0
4
3
Appear Bench
Warrant
Misdmeanor
6
7
1
0
0
2
0
Probation
Technical
Violator
26
48
7
5
6
0
0
Totals
Totals
% Meeting
Standard
# Exceeding
Standard
376
7
56
68
16
92
615
72%
71%
80%
78%
81%
80%
68
1
11
8
1
14
103
% of ADP
11.0%
0.2%
1.7%
1.3%
0.2%
2.2%
16.8%
Source: Two-day jail population sample by the Athens-Clarke County Sheriff's Office with computations by Carter Goble Lee, June 2008.
Jail ADP Potential Reduction – The bottom three rows of Table 33 show the computations used to estimate the total potential reduction that could result if that American Bar Association Standards for pretrial case processing time were met along with a similar standard for disposing of probation technical violators in a timely manner. The ABA standards applied to the five categories of pretrial detainees and the CGL recommended standard applied to probation technical violators are: • Felony Cases – 90% should be concluded within 120 days • Misdemeanant Cases – 90% should be concluded within 30 days • Probation Technical Violator Cases – 95% should be concluded within 30 days As shown in the last row of Table 33 it appears that the current jail ADP could be reduced by approximately 16.8% if the recommended processing standards were met for all six categories of pretrial detention. This is virtually the same ratio of total reduction potential as the 17% that was found in the Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 61 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE 2001 Needs Assessment. However, the makeup of that ratio in 2001 consisted of 6% for pretrial felons, 7% for pretrial misdemeanants and 4% for probation technical violators. Table 33 indicates that a much greater percentage of the reduction is more likely to come from felony cases at almost 13%, very few from misdemeanant cases at only 1.5% and only 2.2% from technical violators. This different trend may be indicative of the jail now being used more so for felons and less for misdemeanants than was the case in 2001. To some extent the number of jail detainees that may be found to be eligible today for pretrial diversion could be less than in 2001 when the jail tended to hold many more misdemeanants. For this reason the reduced “alternative future projection” developed hereunder in 2008 will be more cautious than the model used in 2001, which assumed a combined reduction impact of 8% for implementing the diversion center and a pretrial release program. Both programs are still highly recommended by the consultant as they are proven “evidence‐based” successful strategies in many locations throughout the U.S. as described at the end of the Task 3 report. Recommended Alternative Future Projection – The 16.8% reduction factor found in Table 33 will be applied to the status quo projection from Table 31 to indicate the ADP and compute the operational bed capacity that could be planned for assuming that the above process standards were implemented and sustained in the future. Historically, pretrial inmates have accounted for about 62% of the total jail population from 2005 through 2007. Since the County intends to expand the scope and provision of alternative sanctions and diversion programs with its new mental health court and the proposed diversion center, it is expected that the proportion of county‐sentenced inmates retained in the Jail will eventually be reduced and the jail would increase its share of pretrial detainees. Since 2001, the four highest annual pretrial inmate percentages averaged 65%, which will be used to estimate the number of pretrial inmates from 2015 and beyond to 2030. The more recent 3‐year average of 62% pretrial inmates will be used for the projection to 2010. Table 34 below illustrates the effect of reducing the current and projected pretrial population by 16.8%. With pretrial inmates accounting for 62% of the total through 2010, reducing them by 16.8% yields an overall ADP reduction of about 10.5%. With a 65% pretrial population from 2015 onward, a 16.8% reduction yields an 11% overall reduction to the total inmate population. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 62 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 34
Recommended Alternative Future Bed Need Projection
Projected ADP (Status Quo)
2007*
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
447.0
532.6
603.7
674.8
746.0
817.1
Pre-trial Inmates @ 62% (65% 2015 & forward)
277.1
330.2
392.4
438.6
484.9
531.1
Sentenced Inmated @ 38% (35% 2015 & forward)
169.9
202.4
211.3
236.2
261.1
286.0
Pre-trial Inmates (16.8% Reduction)
230.6
274.7
326.5
365.0
403.4
441.9
Projected ADP (w/ Pre-trial ADP Reduction)
400.4
477.1
537.8
601.2
664.5
727.8
Peaking @ 8.27%
n/a
39
44
50
55
60
Classification @ 5%
n/a
24
27
30
33
36
n/a
540
609
681
753
824
Total Bed Need
Source: Carter Goble Associates, June 2008
* Historical, Source: Clarke County Jail Daily Watch Commander Report and June 2008 sample surveys of pretrial detainee lengths of stay.
Reducing pretrial population by 16.8% to meet ABA and the recommended standard for probation technical violators processing time effectively reduces the total number of beds needed in 2010 by 63, for a total operational capacity need of 540 beds. The 2020 operational need reduces to approximately 681 beds, an 83 bed reduction, and the bed need by 2030 is approximately 824, a reduction of 102 beds. Summary of the Impact of Alternatives on Bed Space Needs Table 35 illustrates the potential impact of all the alternatives and items discussed and their potential impact on the future bed space needs. Table 35 Program Impact on Future Bedspace Needs
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Projected Bed Need (Status Quo)
603
684
764
845
926
Pre‐trial Reduction
63
75
83
92
102
Total Bed Need (w/ Pre‐trial Reduction)
540
609
681
753
824
Diversion Center Reduction
22
25
28
31
33
518
584
653
722
791
18
22
26
31
37
500
562
627
691
754
7
8
10
12
15
493
554
617
679
Total Bed Need (w/Diversion Center Reduction)
Drug Court Reduction (Felony and Misdemeanant)
Total Bed Need (w/ Drug Court Reduction)
Mental Health Court Reduction
Total Bed Need (w/ Mental Health Court Reduction)
$ 1,359,666 $ 698,610
$ 1,359,666 $ 790,166
$ 510,120 $ 307,287
$ 10,898,910 $ 3,955,403
Source: Carter Goble Associates, 2008
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. $ 7,669,458 $ 2,159,340
739
Total Savings:
* Projected Savings are in 2008 Dollars
Capital Cost Operational Savings by Cost Savings 2030* by 2030*
‐ 63 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Each program and reduction strategy in Table 35 is calculated from the previous item, but is not dependant on that item to be effective. The Drug Court reductions are based upon projections assuming both Courts will be operating at full capacity. If either, or both, Courts were to expand their capacity of participants, this number could increase. The “Capital Cost Savings by 2030” column projects the potential construction cost savings by reducing the number of beds that will be needed for each reduction strategy. These figures were calculated for the required housing space only. The amount of space needed for core facilities was not reduced. The “Operational Cost Savings by 2030” column was calculated by multiplying the number of beds saved for each strategy by the current per diem ($58/day), times 365 days. Both of these columns show the projected savings in 2008 dollars. If all of the reduction strategies were fully implemented, the combined savings by 2030 could be approximately 187 beds and nearly $15 million in capital and operating costs.
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 64 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 5 Re‐evaluate 2004 Rosser International Jail Expansion Model UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 5 Re‐evaluate 2004 Rosser International Jail Expansion Model Recommend alternative, economical schemes that include phasing strategies to match the new 10‐ and 20‐year capacity projections. Include concept drawings and preliminary project cost estimates for the recommended options. Using information selected from the Rosser International – CGL report, “Conceptual Design Report, Jail/ Judicial Outpost/ Work Release Center”, dated April 15, 2004, and subsequent analysis by Carter Goble Lee, two overall site planning concepts were prepared. Both options retain existing housing pods A through H, which will be renovated to dormitory occupancy, with a total capacity of 190 beds. In the two schemes, identified as Options A and B, the existing “airplane” is removed and the existing medical facility is retained and expanded. Both Options A and B have an initial (Phase 1) capacity of 670 beds, including the 190 beds in the existing housing units, with the potential to add 160 more beds in a second phase. The site will accommodate up to an additional 322 beds in an ultimate site “build‐out” for a total inmate capacity of 1,152 beds. As noted, Options A and B allow phased growth of the jail based on present and anticipated future needs and the availability of funding. The “core” elements, i.e. Administration/Support, Judicial Outpost, Intake, Medical, Food Service and Laundry, Inmate Programs, and Sheriff’s Training, are programmed and constructed in Phase 1 to accommodate a future maximum population of up to 1,152 inmates. Housing expansion is located to allow future construction to take place without disrupting existing operations or having major impacts on facility security. Option A This option is a variation of Site Option 2 presented in the 2004 report. The Administration/Support/ Judicial building, a portion of which will be two stories high, is located on the south side of the complex with public access from a public parking area. Phase 1 housing is situated adjacent to the administrative/support component, with Intake on the east side of the complex. The food service and laundry areas, the medical component, and program spaces provide a link to existing housing pods A through H. Housing expansion can take place on the northern portion of the site. One advantage of this option is the ability to locate Administration/Support and the Judicial Outpost outside the secure perimeter, separated from the rest of the facility. Also, locating Intake on the east side of the complex allows separation from inmate housing areas. Option B Option B is similar to Option A in the location of Phase 1 housing, but locates Administration/Support on the east side of the complex. The expanded medical area is in a central area of the facility, convenient to all housing pods. Intake is placed across a main corridor from Medical to provide a desirable relationship of these functions. The central element of the complex also contains the satellite food service area, laundry, and program areas. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 65 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Phases In both options, the initial housing capacity of 670 beds consists of 190 dormitory beds in existing housing buildings, three 32‐bed pods, and six 64‐bed pods. Phase 2 adds 160 beds made up of one 32‐
bed and two 64‐bed pods. The build‐out capacity of 1,152 was determined by adding three 64‐bed pods (192 beds), double‐bunking two 32‐bed pods (64 more beds), and replacing the originally existing housing pods A‐H with four 64‐bed pods (256 – 190 = 66 beds). The build‐out phase adds 322 beds for an ultimate facility capacity of 1,152 beds (670 + 160 + 322). Figure 6 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 66 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Figure 7 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 67 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 36 gives an overview of the projected space requirements for a renovated and expanded jail. Table 36 Athens-Clarke County Jail Summary Table
COMPONENT
DGSF
NON‐HOUSING AREAS
1.000 Public Lobby
2.000 Detention Administration
3.000 Booking, Transfer and Release
4.000 Master Control
5.000 Security Administration and Classification
6.000 Program Services Suite
7.000 Medical Services
8.000 Food Services
9.000 Laundry Services
10.000 Warehousing
11.000 Building Management
12.000 Detention Staff Services Area
13.000 Sheriff's Training Area
Subtotal Non-Housing Area
SECURE HOUSING (670 BEDS)
14.000 HOUSING
14.100 3 - 32 Single Cell Units
6 - 32 Double Cell Units
Existing Housing Units
Subtotal Housing Areas
JUDICIAL OUTPOST
Subtotal Judicial Outpost
TOTAL SPACE PROGRAM
Bldg. Gross
Total BGSF
5,439
3,599
12,711
683
2,002
1,683
6,324
3,374
1,688
3,225
1,975
4,804
6,533
54,040
1,360
900
3,178
171
500
421
1,581
843
422
806
494
1,201
1,633
13,510
6,799
4,499
15,889
854
2,502
2,104
7,905
4,217
2,110
4,031
2,469
6,005
8,166
67,550
3,564
24,000
55,578
30,000
113,142
891
6,000
13,895
7,500
28,286
4,455
30,000
69,473
37,500
141,428
4,800
171,982
1,200
42,996
6,000
214,978
Comparison with Rosser Projection Table 37 compares CGL’s revised projections with the 2004 Rosser study. The Rosser report priced the project in 2005 dollars at a cost of $310 per square foot. Rosser also calculated Indirect Costs at a rate of 20%. We feel an appropriate calculation to be 35% for indirect costs, so the Rosser projections have been updated to 35%. Rosser’s projection for the total project cost has been escalated to 2008 dollars using a conservative rate of 8% per year. Finally, Rosser used a construction cost of $310 per square foot. A cost of $327 per square foot is more realistic today, so their numbers have been recalculated to $327 per square foot. This brings the total cost of the Rosser plan to $83,172,777 in 2008 dollars. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 68 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 37 Component
CGL/Rosser Cost Comparison
CGL (2008) 214,978 SF @ $327/SF
Jail & Judicial Outpost
$ 70,297,806 $ 78,848,810
Cost Escalation (2005‐2008)
Project Cost (both @ $327/sq’)
Rosser (2005) 254,351 SF @ $310/SF
$ 4,323,967 $ 70,297,806 $ 83,172,777 Cost Difference
$ 12,874,971 Source: Carter Goble Associates, 2008
The following table is a listing of Exemplary Jail Construction and Project Cost Comparisons: Table 38 Year Mid‐Point Facility Occupied Construction St. Louis City, 2001 2000 MO Justice Center St. Louis Co., 1997 1996 MO, Justice Center Maricopa Co., 2003 2002 Fourth Avenue Justice Center Mecklenburg 1996 1995 Co., NC Jail Central Exp. Phase I Mecklenburg 2002 2001 Co., NC Jail Central Exp. Phase II Franklin Co., 2007 2005 PA, Detention Center Fort Bend, TX, 2009 2007 Jail Expansion Beds 848
SF 280,093
Construction Cost $57,500,000
Inflated Constr. to June Cost/SF 2007 Cost/Bed $205.29 $286.17 $94,521
1,232
503,000
$95,000,000
$188.87 $294.83 $120,373
1,360
650,000
$91,070,500
$140.11 $181.58 $86,785
1,004
423,000
$55,600,000
$131.44 $204.52 $86,167
900
265,000
$53,000,000
$200.00 $293.00 $86,272
428
137,975
$29,996,000
$217.40 $243.49 $78,494
1,008
212,000+
$66,372,860
AVERAGE Construction Cost/SF =
AVERAGE Project Cost/SF @ 30 % =
$286.000 $286.00 $60,151+
$255.66 $332.35 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 69 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 6 Provide Recommendations and Cost Estimates UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 6 Provide Recommendations and Cost Estimates Prepare criminal justice system improvement recommendations, jail expansion recommendations, and preliminary capital project and operating cost estimates. This section provides Athens‐Clarke County officials the final updates to the 2003 Criminal Justice Needs Assessment report, and recommended system improvement actions and programs. These recommendations begin with a review of the recommendations made in the 2003 needs assessment report. Criminal Justice Process Interventions 1. Re‐establish a Pretrial Release Program 2003 Report Recommendation: the immediate implementation of a Pretrial Service Program. This would consist of staff supported by the Sheriff’s Department, and headquartered in the Judicial Outpost. Current Recommendation: This is still a viable recommendation that, along with other process interventions, could account for a 4% reduction in jail ADP. Office space for 3 full time staff should be located in the Judicial Outpost. Preliminary Cost Estimate: $300,000 minus $70,000 from participant reimbursements. 2. Implement a Mental Health Court as determined by judicial officials 2003 Report Recommendation: The previous report indicated that while this option may not have a significant impact on the jail population, the community is often better served with this type of alternative programming. Current Recommendation: Plans are currently underway for the implementation of a Mental Health Court. The intent is to divert qualifying offenders to treatment rather than jail. This program should be fully implemented and supported with necessary staff to ensure its success. Preliminary Cost Estimate: The FY2009 budget for the program is $288,359. A federal grant should fund 69% of this cost leaving 31%, or $89,391, for local funding. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 70 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE 3. Continue criminal case processing/flow improvements: 2003 Report Recommendation: Examine methods of speeding up judicial, prosecutor, and defense case assignments. Current Recommendation: This is still a viable recommendation that can be enhanced with implementing measures to meet ABA time guidelines for processing cases through the court system. It is important to note that while improvement could be made via increasing case time flows by the work of the Judiciary and staff that there could also be a system need such as a change in the scheduling system and associated software and/or hardware. Thus, the time cost of staff and the Judiciary and any need for new software and/or hardware could result in a cost to achieve case flow improvement. Expansion of Jail 4. Capacity Expansion 2003 Report Recommendation: The previous report recommended an expansion to 609 beds by the year 2016. This capacity would have consisted of 400 new beds and 209 remodeled existing beds. Current Recommendation: Revised projections indicate a need for approximately 681 beds by 2020 (phase 1), and 824 beds by 2030 (phase 2). The 2 newest housing units (190 beds) should be kept. The remaining, existing beds should be replaced with approximately 491 new beds. Various options presented in this report can reduce the demands for bed space. They will each require modifications to both policy and practice to accomplish. Preliminary Cost Estimate: The total cost of a jail expansion and renovation is projected to be $70,297,806. 5. Existing Space Improvements 2003 Report Recommendation: It was previously recommended that new administrative, program, support services areas, staff support space and energy plant were required. The medical space was one of the only core spaces that was not recommended for replacement. Current Recommendation: Inspection of the existing facilities by our registered engineer indicates water leakage in the medical unit is secondary to the problems in housing, but is concerned about potential health claims due to Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 71 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE exposure to mold spores if not properly remedied. Sheriff’s officials have indicated a desire to keep the existing medical space in the future building/renovation plans. The proposed jail configurations offered in this report include keeping the existing medical space. However, it is recommended the County consider replacing this area during the expansion and renovation project. Preliminary Cost Estimate: Included in cost projections for jail expansion and renovation. Development of Judicial Outpost 2003 Report Recommendation: The County should construct a satellite Judicial Outpost that would include a small court hearing room, and space for judicial, prosecutorial, defense bar staff, and Drug Court functions. 6. Current Recommendation: The Judicial Outpost is still needed to replace the need to provide certain judicial activities in the downtown courthouse. The recommended Outpost plans are now included in the proposed jail configurations included in this report. Pretrial release staff can be located in the Judicial Outpost. The Judiciary could also hear motions; and conduct arraignments and preliminary hearings here if they choose. This would also limit the amount of inmate transportation required for these court appearances. Preliminary Cost Estimate: The projected cost of $1,350,000 is part of the jail expansion project. Development of a Diversion Center 2003 Report Recommendation: A 72‐bed Diversion Center should be constructed adjacent to the County Correctional Facility. The Center would initially contain 18 beds for work release offenders and 54 beds for alternative sentencing programs. 7. Current Recommendation: A Diversion Center is still a needed alternative, and plans are currently under‐way for the implementation of this alternative. A 50‐bed Diversion Center with four 12/13‐bed units is recommended. Initially, about half of these beds will be needed for work release offenders, with the other beds available for other alternative sentencing programs. Multiple housing sections will afford the flexibility for separating inmates with various needs, and can accommodate male and female offenders. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 72 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE County officials asked for proposed components of a Diversion Center with little‐to‐no programs, and an option with more extensive programming for offenders. While constructing and operating a program‐rich facility will be more expensive than one with no programs, research has indicated that programs and counseling in this environment can reduce recidivism by 22%, compared to no reduction with surveillance and reporting, alone. Preliminary Cost Estimate: Depending on which option is selected, the price could range from $4.1 million for a minimal Diversion Center that offers no programs for participants, to more than $5.1 million for substantial programming and co‐location of probation offices. System Coordination Improvement 2003 Report Recommendation: The County should either substantially improve or replace the JALAN justice information system, and appoint an “Integrated Criminal Justice Information System Committee” (ICJIS) to evaluate the feasibility of a unified justice information system that would meet the needs of all justice agencies. 8. Current Recommendation: The Courts have recently upgraded their information system, and now has controlled internet access to much of their data. The jails information system was not included in this upgrade. The Courts can access Jail information through dedicated terminals at the courthouse, and the Jail can use the Court’s new system. However, they are still two stand‐alone systems. All components of the local criminal justice system will benefit from a system that integrates data from all justice agencies. Summary Total Construction and Operating Cost Impacts By developing the recommended justice system intervention programs, significant construction cost and annual operating expense savings will result for the County due to being able to construct and operate a 670‐bed jail rather than a 764‐bed jail, which is the required capacity in 2020 if the alternative programs are not implemented. The Judicial Outpost and renovation of the Medical Unit are parts of the proposed jail construction and renovation, but the costs have been separated out for illustrative purposes. Table 39 summarizes the total preliminary cost estimates for construction and annual operating expense differences and savings from following the recommended strategy plan versus only building a larger jail. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 73 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 39 Summary of All Construction and Operating Cost Estimates 670‐Bed Jail Proposed Plan Proposed Plan
764‐Bed Jail
Savings
Component
Jail ‐ New Construction
$ 44,322,450 $ 53,622,525 $ 9,300,075
Jail ‐ Housing Renovation
$ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000 $ ‐
Jail ‐ Mecial Unit Renovation
$ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ ‐
Judicial Outpost
$ 1,350,000 $ 1,350,000 $ ‐
Construction Cost Totals
$ 52,072,450 $ 61,372,525 $ 9,300,075
Associated Project Cost @ 35%
$ 18,225,358 $ 21,480,384 $ 3,255,026
Total Project Development
$ 70,297,806 $ 82,852,909 $ 12,555,101
Annual Operating Expenses
Jail
$ 12,100,000 $ 13,600,000 $ 1,500,000
Mental Health Court
$ 89,391 $ ‐
$ (89,391)
Pre‐trial Release Program
$ 300,000 $ ‐
$ (300,000)
Pre‐trial Revenue
$ (70,000) $ ‐
$ 70,000
Total Operating Expense
$ 12,419,391 $ 13,600,000 $ 1,180,609 Note: All cost estimates are in 2008 dollars. The Diversion Center is being displayed separately due to the various options being presented. Option 1 has administrative space, participant housing, and space for a day reporting function, but little‐
to‐no programs space. The purpose of this facility would be to house a residential work release program and a “surveillance only” day reporting operation. Option 2 expands on Option 1 by adding space for more extensive programming for offenders. Option 3 looks at co‐locating County Probation in the Diversion Center. The estimated revenue for Option 3 is the same as Option 2, as it does not include fees generated by probationers. It has been reported that the revenues generated by probationers may offset, or even exceed, the operational costs Probation. If this is the case, the revenues will significantly increase, and the operational supplement needed would decrease significantly. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 74 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Table 40 Diversion Center Options Cost Estimates Summary Diversion Center Cost
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Total Capital Project Cost
$ 4,176,714 $ 4,523,263 $ 5,184,721
SPLOST Project 033 Budget
$ 970,000 $ 970,000 $ 970,000
Capital Supplement Needed
$ (3,206,714) $ (3,553,263) $ (4,214,721)
Estimated Start‐up Cost
$ 82,191 $ 85,191 $ 85,191
Operational Cost
Estimated Revenue
Operational Supplement Needed
$ 633,810 $ 713,309 $ 713,309
$ 158,958 $ 179,763 $ 179,763
$ (474,852) $ (533,546) $ (533,546)
Source: Carter Goble Associates, August 2008
Square footage and project cost details for these options are included in the appendix of this report. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 75 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 7 Recommend Implementation Schedule for All Proposed System Improvements and Jail Expansion UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Task 7 Recommend Implementation Schedule for All Proposed System Improvements and Jail Expansion Prepare a recommended project implementation schedule that meets the Unified Government’s likely capital project and operating financial capacities. Schedule The recommended strategy plan includes two capital construction projects plus several recommended intervention programs. Those intervention programs including the Pretrial release Program and Mental Health Court may be more easily implemented with the availability of the Judicial Outpost. Table 41 provides a recommended general implementation schedule, which will allow for the logical sequencing of all components. Table 41 QTR 2
FY 2014
QTR 4
QTR 3
QTR 2
QTR 1
QTR 4
QTR 3
QTR 1
2013
FY 2013
QTR 1
2012
FY 2012
QTR 4
QTR 3
QTR 1
QTR 4
QTR 3
QTR 1
QTR 4
QTR 3
QTR 2
QTR 1
ACTION ITEM
2011
FY 2011
QTR 2
2010
FY 2010
QTR 2
2009
FY 2009
QTR 2
2008
Mayor and Commission Approvals
Caseflow Intervention Enhancements
ICJIS Committee Report & Improvement
Jail Expansion – Pre‐design Study
Jail Expansion – Design
Jail Expansion ‐ Construction
Diversion Center – Design
Diversion Center – Construction
Implement Pre‐trial Release
Enhance Drug Court Operation
Implement Mental Health Court
Implementation Strategy The following narratives describe the rationale and general strategy recommended for each of the actions items that comprise the final strategic plan. They are listed in the same order used in the lmplementation Schedule Chart. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 76 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE 1. Mayor and Commission Approvals ‐ The results of this update of the 2001‐2003 Justice System Needs Assessment should be adopted by the Mayor and Commission to serve as a general implementation guide and schedule for the various system interventions and facility development projects. A final review and concurrence by the User Group involved in this study update would be useful prior to adoption. If the adoption could be made in the summer of 2008, work could then commence by the fall on several of the recommended actions. Subsequent milestone approval targets in 2004 and 2005 are noted for: • receipt of, and action on, the ICJIS Committee report and recommendation, and approval of the Diversion Center design in the 1st Quarter of FY 2010; • review and approval of the Pre‐design studies for the Jail Expansion and co‐located Judicial Outpost in the 1st Quarter of FY 2011; • referendum development from 1st to 3rd Quarter in FY 2011; • approval of the final design and construction budgets for bidding the Jail Expansion, Judicial Outpost and Diversion Center in the 1st Quarter of FY 2012; and • acceptance of bids and construction starting in the 1st Quarter of FY 2012 (allow 2 years for Jail construction). 2. Caseflow Intervention Enhancements ‐ The improvements already started by the Courts and Prosecution need to be continued and enhanced even further. The jurisdiction's jail population growth was primarily due to increases in arrests, as the length of stay of its pretrial inmate population has remained constant. Although the jurisdiction's court system was found to be operating efficiently, opportunities exist for reducing pretrial lengths of stay. These opportunities center on a timelier scheduling of jail cases and a speeding up of the time it takes to hear Probation Violation cases. It is projected that the jail ADP can be reduced approximately 16.8% if the recommended processing standards (American Bar Association) were met for all six categories of pretrial detention. With the proposed jail expansion and construction of a new Diversion Center it is critical that the judiciary, prosecution and defense bar continue to strive for efficient criminal processing, especially for jail cases to avoid a return to overcrowding. 3. ICJIS Committee and Report – This is a repeated recommendation from the 2001‐2003 report. Assuming that the Committee is formed and authorized to begin work by September 2008 a 4‐
month study period through the end of December or January at the latest should be ample time for completing the evaluation and making an action recommendation to the Mayor and Commission. The sooner that an IT improvement project can be implemented following the Committee's work, the better for the Unified Government's criminal justice system. Although a direct impact on reducing the demand for jail beds is difficult to prove, it is certain that the flow and efficiency of the jurisdiction's criminal process can be improved by the widespread use of a coordinated justice information system. 4. Jail Pre‐Design, Design and Construction ‐ This major capital project will require the longest time to accomplish of any of the action items included in the Strategy Plan. Based on the current schedule established by SPLOST a July/August 2008 approval of this study by the Mayor and Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 77 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Commission would support the proposed "Pre‐design Study" for an A/E team to complete an architectural program, concept design and sound cost estimate for the Jail remodeling and expansion. Once the Pre‐design concept plan and a budget are established the development of a funding referendum should be completed during the 1st and 2nd quarters of FY 2010. This would enable detailed design to be completed in about a 9‐month period starting in late 2011. Approximately two years would be allowed for the completion and move‐in of the new expanded jail. Also, as noted on the chart the proposed Judicial Outpost could be included as part of the same design and construction project, which would provide some schedule and cost advantages compared to developing them as separate projects. 5. Diversion Center Design and Construction ‐ This type of low‐security residential and day‐
reporting facility should be able to be designed in six months or less and construction completed in less than one year. The Center is proposed to be located near the Clarke County Correctional Institution or County Jail in order to achieve some operating efficiencies as part of the existing local corrections system. Since the 50‐bed allocation for alternative sentencing and work release will reduce jail population this project should be implemented as soon as possible. 6. Implement Pretrial Release – This is a repeated recommendation from the 2001‐2003 report. Although this Judicial Outpost portion of the new jail probably cannot be made available until 2013 as shown in the schedule chart, the Pretrial release program could still be implemented by action of the courts and prosecution with funding support from the jurisdiction in 2009. This program has the potential for making a substantial impact on reducing the number of jail detainees (at least 4% estimated ADP reduction) and should therefore be implemented as soon as possible and considered to be a high priority. Until the Outpost is ready this program would operate with staff located either in the Courthouse or some alternate office space as available and could be operated either by the Sheriff’s Office or the Unified Government. 7. Continue Drug Court Operation ‐ While the eventual use of the Judicial Outpost for the Drug Court will improve its total operating conditions and impact, short‐term operating improvements should provide a boost in the program's capacity and jail case diversion volume. 8. Implement Mental Health Court ‐ This is a repeated recommendation from the 2001‐2003 report. Similar to the Drug Court, but for even less cost the courts should be able to proceed with a basic mental health court operation well before the Judicial Outpost is ready for occupancy. This could be done within existing court dockets by simply focusing more effort on the diversion of at least those misdemeanant cases that are found to have a mental disorder that is likely to be at the root of the offender's problem. With the cooperation of local mental health provider agencies for diagnostic, treatment, and monitoring support the courts should be able to increase the number of jail case referrals. At a minimum the County should enhance the availability of mental health services to the courts. Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ 78 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐ CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE Appendices UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 1 CORRESPONDENCE FROM ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY POLICE
DEPARTMENT CONCERNING THE POLICIES, PRACTICES AND
RATIONAL THAT GOVERN "NUISANCE ARRESTS."
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A1‐1 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 1 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A1‐2 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 1 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A1‐3 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 1 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A1‐4 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 1 Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A1‐5 ‐ Final Report ‐ August 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 DIVERSION CENTER DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS COST ESTIMATES AND SPACE NEEDS Option 1 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with No Programs Option 2 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs Option 3 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs and Probation The following pages present detailed estimates in each of the following categories for each of the three development options: • Conceptual Capital Cost Estimate • Conceptual Operating Cost Estimate • Projected Staffing Budget Summary • Projected Annual Operational Costs • Estimated Operating Revenue • Estimated Operating Expense Supplement • Building Space Needs Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐1 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 1 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with No Programs CONCEPTUAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE
ITEM
LAND
$0 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
Site work (15%)
Administration Building Space
Program Space
Participant Space
Bid/Design Contingency (10% site, renovation, new construction)
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
$3,196,102
$365,269
$1,124,375
$114,750
$1,196,000
$243,513
$3,043,906
INFLATION 2008 ‐ 2009 (5% included in above construction cost)
INFLATION ADJUSTMENT
DESIGN FEES TOTAL
Architect (Fee calcuated at the rate of 8%, Interpo.)
TESTING TOTAL
Topo & Hazardous Material surveys
Geotechnical Special Inspections
NPDES
Commissioning ‐ Pre‐design
Commissioning (Des/Constr ‐ LEED Certification)
Uncommitted
$152,195
$3,196,102
$255,688
$255,688
$40,000
$4,000
$2,000
$10,000
$5,000
$4,000
$15,000
$0
F.F. & E. TOTAL (incl Systems)
Furniture (New Const. FF&E 9 to 13%, used 11%)
Security Systems (2%)
$415,493
$351,571
$63,922
Uncommitted
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Project Management ‐ Design (Fee 2.48% Interpo.)
Project Management ‐ Construction (Fee 5.95 %, Interpo.)
Uncommitted
MISCELLANEOUS
Uncommitted
$269,431
$79,263
$190,168
$0
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (CGL Feels added N/A)
TOTAL PROBABLE CAPITAL PROJECT COST
$4,176,714 ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST SUPPLEMENT
($3,206,714)
Please note that cost per bed not shown. Cost per bed will not be accurate for a facility with multiple mixed operational uses.
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐2 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 1 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with No Programs (Continued)
PROJECTED START-UP COSTS
Vehicles
$48,000
Radios
$14,091
Law Enforcement Equipment
$4,500
Furniture (included in building costs)
$0
Telecommunications
$600
Computers & IT
$15,000
TOTAL START-UP COST
$82,191
PROJECTED STAFFING BUDGET SUMMARY
BENEFITS
SALARY &
BENEFITS
$44,629
$29,055
$11,751
$8,637
$56,380
$37,692
$94,072
$56,380
$37,692
16
$36,287
$10,083
$46,370
$92,740
$92,740
19
14
13
$40,460
$33,507
$32,116
$10,917
$9,527
$9,249
$51,377
$43,034
$41,365
$430,338
$51,377
$172,136
$206,825
STAFF
REQ'D
GRADE
ADMINISTRATION
Superintendent
Accounting Technician
2
1
1
22
11
CASE MANAGEMENT
Case Manager
2
2
SECURITY PERSONNEL
Correctional Supervisor
Correctional Officer I
Correctional Officer II
10
1
4
5
TOTAL STAFF / PROJECTED COST
14
POSITION TITLE
SALARY
SUBTOTALS
TOTAL STAFFING COSTS $617,150
PROJECTED ANUAL OPERATIONAL COSTS
OPERATING EXPENSES
fees, clothing/uniforms, office supplies
$10,000
INDIRECT EXPENSES
vehicle fuel & maintenance, telephones
$0
BUILDING EXPENSES
utilities, alarm monitoring
$6,660
TOTAL OPERATIONAL COST
$16,660
TOTAL Staff + Operating
$633,810
ESTIMATED OPERATING REVENUE
TOTAL OPERATIONAL REVENUE
$158,958
Work Release
Comm. Sprv.
Participants Avg Daily Fee
28
$12.50
57
$1.50
ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSE SUPPLEMENT
TOTAL OPERATIONAL EXPENSE SUPPLEMENT
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ($474,853)
‐ A2‐3 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 1 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with No Programs (Continued)
Building Space Needs
ENTRY CONTROL
Entry Vestibule Visitors and Staff
Reception Counter
Lobby Waiting Intake Room/Admissions
Case Manager/Social Worker
Visitor Toilets
Non‐Contact Visiting
Contact Visiting
Attorney Visiting
Occupant Entry
QNTY
1@
1@
1@
1@
1@
2@
1@
2@
2@
1@
ADMINISTRATION
QNTY
Visitor Waiting
1@
Superintendent Office
1@
Private Office w/conference space for four Assistant Superintendant
1@
Accounting
Office / Files
1@
Administrative Staff
Workstations
3@
Case Managers 3 workstations
3@
Share Program Conference Room
1@
Job Procurement Manager
1@
Assistant
1@
Conference Room
1@
Security
Correctional Supervisor Office
2@
Correctional Officers ‐ 3 WS
3@
(Total staff of 5 Officer I & 5 Officer II)
Control Room
1@
File/Copy Space
1@
Case Records/Historic Files
1@
Treatment Room/Clinic
1@
Staff/Public Restrooms
Male accessible
2@
Female accessible
2@
Staff Break Room
1@
Janitors Closet
1@
SIZE
8 x
6 x
12 x
8 x
10 x
6 x
12 x
8 x
8 x
10 x
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
64
72
180
80
150
96
180
160
160
100
SIZE
6 x 12 =
12 x 18 =
72
216
12 x
15 =
180
12 x
15 =
180
6 x
8 =
144
9
12
12
10
14
x
x
x
x
x
=
=
=
=
=
324
144
216
120
280
12 =
8 =
240
144
12
18 =
15
12 =
=
x 12 =
x 15 =
x 15 =
x
6 =
sub‐total
96
216
180
120
10 x
6 x
8
12
12
10
8
8
12
5
8
12
15
10
15
8
15
10
10
10
12
12
18
12
20
x
x
x
x
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
ADMINISTRATION TOTAL
192
240
180
30
4756
1665
6425 Square Feet @
$175
$1,124,375
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐4 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 1 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with No Programs (Continued)
Building Space Needs (Continued)
PARTICIPANT SPACES
Holding Cell
Strip Search
Activity/Day Room @ 25sf/participant
Food prep and serving
Laundry
PARTICIPANT HOUSING
12 Bed Unit
Toilets
2t+2u+3s/3t+3S
Showers
2 units
Linen & Supplies
Janitor Closet
Properties
QNTY
2@
2@
2@
1@
1@
4
4
4
1
1
2
@
@
@
@
@
@
SIZE
7 x
8 x
25 X
18 X
12 X
7
10
24
35
18
=
=
=
=
=
#
12 x 42 =
11 x
9 =
6 x
9 =
x 220 =
x 70 =
x 150 =
sub‐total
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
PARTICIPANT TOTAL
PROGRAM SPACE
Day Reporting (share program space)
Enlarged Waiting Check‐in Counter
Drug screening restroom
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
QNTY
1@
1@
1@
1@
SIZE
12 x 15 =
10 x 20 =
10 x
6 =
8 x
6 =
sub‐total
PPROGRAM SPACE TOTAL
TOTAL BUILDING INCLUDING PROGRAM SPACE
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. 98
160
1200
630
216
2016
396
216
220
70
300
5522
1933
7475 Square Feet @
180
200
60
48
488 Square Feet @
171
675 Square Feet @
14575 Square Feet
$160
$1,196,000
$170
$82,960
$170
$114,750
$2,435,125
‐ A2‐5 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 2 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs CONCEPTUAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE
ITEM
LAND
$0 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
Site work (15%)
$3,463,852
$395,869
Administration Building Space
$1,124,375
Program Space
$318,750
Participant Space
$1,196,000
Bid/Design Contingency (10% site, renovation, new construction)
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
INFLATION 2008 ‐ 2009 (5% included in above construction cost)
INFLATION ADJUSTMENT
$263,913
$3,298,906
$164,945
$3,463,852
DESIGN FEES TOTAL
$277,108
Architect (Fee calcuated at the rate of 8%, Interpo.)
$277,108
TESTING TOTAL
$40,000
Topo & Hazardous Material surveys
$4,000
Geotechnical $2,000
Special Inspections
$10,000
NPDES
$5,000
Commissioning ‐ Pre‐design
$4,000
$15,000
Commissioning (Des/Constr ‐ LEED Certification)
Uncommitted
$0
F.F. & E. TOTAL (incl Systems)
Furniture (New Const. FF&E 9 to 13%, used 11%)
$450,301
$381,024
Security Systems (2%)
$69,277
Uncommitted
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
$292,003
Project Management ‐ Design (Fee 2.48% Interpo.)
$85,904
Project Management ‐ Construction (Fee 5.95 %, Interpo.)
$206,099
Uncommitted
MISCELLANEOUS
$0
Uncommitted
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (CGL Feels added N/A)
TOTAL PROBABLE CAPITAL PROJECT COST
$4,523,263 ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST SUPPLEMENT
($3,553,263)
Please note that cost per bed not shown. Cost per bed will not be accurate for a facility with multiple mixed operational uses.
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐6 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 2 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs (Continued)
PROJECTED START-UP COSTS
Vehicles
$48,000
Radios
$14,091
Law Enforcement Equipment
$4,500
Furniture (NOT included in building costs)
$0
Telecommunications
$600
Computers & IT
$18,000
TOTAL START-UP COST
$85,191
PROJECTED STAFFING BUDGET SUMMARY
BENEFITS
SALARY &
BENEFITS
$44,629
$29,055
$11,751
$8,637
$56,380
$37,692
$94,072
$56,380
$37,692
16
16
$36,287
$36,287
$10,083
$10,083
$46,370
$46,370
$139,110
$92,740
$46,370
19
14
13
$40,460
$33,507
$32,116
$10,917
$9,527
$9,249
$51,377
$43,034
$41,365
$430,338
$51,377
$172,136
$206,825
STAFF
REQ'D
GRADE
ADMINISTRATION
Superintendent
Accounting Technician
2
1
1
22
11
CASE MANAGEMENT
Case Manager
Programs Coordinator
3
2
1
SECURITY PERSONNEL
Correctional Supervisor
Correctional Officer I
Correctional Officer II
10
1
4
5
TOTAL STAFF / PROJECTED COST
15
POSITION TITLE
SALARY
SUBTOTALS
TOTAL STAFFING COSTS
$663,520
TOTAL Staff + Operating
$713,309
PROJECTED ANUAL OPERATIONAL COSTS
OPERATING EXPENSES
fees, clothing/uniforms, office supplies
$16,445
INDIRECT EXPENSES
vehicle fuel & maintenance, telephones
$22,764
BUILDING EXPENSES
utilities, alarm monitoring
$10,580
TOTAL OPERATIONAL COST
$49,789
ESTIMATED OPERATING REVENUE
TOTAL OPERATIONAL REVENUE
$179,763
Participants Avg Daily Fee
28
$12.50
57
$2.50
ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSE SUPPLEMENT
TOTAL OPERATIONAL EXPENSE SUPPLEMENT
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ($533,547)
‐ A2‐7 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 2 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs (Continued)
Building Space Needs
ENTRY CONTROL
Entry Vestibule Visitors and Staff
Reception Counter
Lobby Waiting Intake Room/Admissions
Case Manager/Social Worker
Visitor Toilets
Non‐Contact Visiting
Contact Visiting
Attorney Visiting
Occupant Entry
QNTY
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
ADMINISTRATION
QNTY
Visitor Waiting
1@
Superintendent Office
1@
Private Office w/conference space for four Assistant Superintendant
1@
Accounting
Office / Files
1@
Administrative Staff
Workstations
3@
Case Managers 3 workstations
3@
Share Program Conference Room
1@
Job Procurement Manager
1@
Assistant
1@
Conference Room
1@
Security
Correctional Supervisor Office
2@
Correctional Officers ‐ 3 WS
3@
(Total staff of 5 Officer I & 5 Officer II)
Control Room
1@
File/Copy Space
1@
Case Records/Historic Files
1@
Treatment Room/Clinic
1@
Staff/Public Restrooms
Male accessible
2@
Female accessible
2@
Staff Break Room
1@
Janitors Closet
1@
SIZE
8
6
12
8
10
6
12
8
8
10
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
64
72
180
80
150
96
180
160
160
100
SIZE
6 x
12 =
12 x
18 =
72
216
12 x
15 =
180
12 x
15 =
180
6 x
8 =
144
9
12
12
10
14
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
=
=
=
=
=
324
144
216
120
280
12 =
8 =
240
144
12
18 =
15
12 =
=
x
12 =
x
15 =
x
15 =
x
6 =
sub‐total
96
216
180
120
10 x
6 x
8
12
12
10
8
8
12
5
8
12
15
10
15
8
15
10
10
10
12
12
18
12
20
x
x
x
x
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
ADMINISTRATION TOTAL
192
240
180
30
4756
1665
6425 Square Feet @
$175
$1,124,375
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐8 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 2 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs (Continued)
Building Space Needs (Continued)
PARTICIPANT SPACES
Holding Cell
Strip Search
Activity/Day Room @ 25sf/participant
Food prep and serving
Laundry
PARTICIPANT HOUSING
12 Bed Unit
Toilets
2t+2u+3s/3t+3S
Showers
2 units
Linen & Supplies
Janitor Closet
Properties
QNTY
2@
2@
2@
1@
1@
4
4
4
1
1
2
@
@
@
@
@
@
SIZE
7 x
8 x
25 X
18 X
12 X
12 x
11 x
6 x
x
x
x
7
10
24
35
18
=
=
=
=
=
42 =
9 =
9 =
220 =
70 =
150 =
sub‐total
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
PARTICIPANT TOTAL
PROGRAM SPACE
Life Skills Training Room (10‐15 people)
Group Counseling Space(s) (8+10 people)
Day Reporting (share program space)
Enlarged Waiting Computer Lab
Job Search Library/Legal Library
Check‐in Counter
Large Program space (15 ‐ 20 people)
Small counseling/attorney (one‐to‐one)
Medium Counseling (8‐10 people)
Drug screening restroom
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
QNTY
1@
1@
1@
1@
1@
1@
1@
1@
1@
2@
1@
SIZE
15 x
20 =
15 x
20 =
12 x
15 =
10 x
20 =
10 x
15 =
12 x
18 =
10 x
6 =
16 x
24 =
10 x
14 =
15 x
18 =
8 x
6 =
sub‐total
PPROGRAM SPACE TOTAL
TOTAL BUILDING INCLUDING PROGRAM SPACE
98
160
1200
630
216
2016
396
216
220
70
300
5522
1933
7475 Square Feet @
300
300
180
200
150
216
60
384
140
540
48
1375 Square Feet @
481
1875 Square Feet @
15775 Square Feet
$160
$1,196,000
$170
$233,750
$170
$318,750
$2,639,125
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐9 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 3 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs and Probation Option 3 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs and Probation (Continued)
CONCEPTUAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE
ITEM
LAND
$0 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
$3,974,906
Site work (15%)
$454,275
Administration Building Space
$1,513,750
Program Space
$318,750
Participant Space
$1,196,000
Bid/Design Contingency (10% site, renovation, new construction)
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
$302,850
$3,785,625
$189,281
INFLATION 2008 ‐ 2009 (5% included in above construction cost)
INFLATION ADJUSTMENT
$3,974,906
DESIGN FEES TOTAL
Architect (Fee calcuated at the rate of 8%, Interpo.)
$317,993
$317,993
TESTING TOTAL
Topo & Hazardous Material surveys
Geotechnical Special Inspections
NPDES
Commissioning ‐ Pre‐design
Commissioning (Des/Constr ‐ LEED Certification)
Uncommitted
$40,000
$4,000
$2,000
$10,000
$5,000
$4,000
$15,000
$0
F.F. & E. TOTAL (incl Systems)
Furniture (New Const. FF&E 9 to 13%, used 11%)
$516,738
$437,240
Security Systems (2%)
$79,498
Uncommitted
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Project Management ‐ Design (Fee 2.48% Interpo.)
Project Management ‐ Construction (Fee 5.95 %, Interpo.)
Uncommitted
$335,085
$98,578
$236,507
MISCELLANEOUS
Uncommitted
$0
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (CGL Feels added N/A)
TOTAL PROBABLE CAPITAL PROJECT COST
$5,184,721 ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST SUPPLEMENT
($4,214,721)
Please note that cost per bed not shown. Cost per bed will not be accurate for a facility with multiple mixed operational uses.
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐10 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 3 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs and Probation (Continued)
PROJECTED START-UP COSTS
Vehicles
$48,000
2
Radios
$14,091
Law Enforcement Equipment
$4,500
Furniture (NOT included in building costs)
$0
Telecomunications
$600
Computers & IT
$18,000
TOTAL START-UP COST
$85,191
PROJECTED STAFFING BUDGET SUMMARY
POSITION TITLE
STAFF
REQ'D
GRADE
SALARY
BENEFITS
SALARY &
BENEFITS SUB-TOTALS
ADMINISTRATION
Superintendent
Accounting Technician
2
1
1
22
11
$44,629
$29,055
$11,751
$8,637
$56,380
$37,692
$94,072
$56,380
$37,692
CASE MANAGEMENT
Case Manager
Programs Coordinator
3
2
1
16
16
$36,287
$36,287
$10,083
$10,083
$46,370
$46,370
$139,110
$92,740
$46,370
SECURITY PERSONNEL
Correctional Supervisor
Correctional Officer I
Correctional Officer II
10
1
4
5
19
14
13
$40,460
$33,507
$32,116
$10,917
$9,527
$9,249
$51,377
$43,034
$41,365
$430,338
$51,377
$172,136
$206,825
TOTAL STAFF / PROJECTED COST
TOTAL STAFFING COSTS
15
COMMENTS
$663,520
PROJECTED ANUAL OPERATIONAL COSTS
OPERATING EXPENSES
fees, clothing/uniforms, office supplies
$16,445
INDIRECT EXPENSES
vehicle fuel & maintenance, telephones
$22,764
BUILDING EXPENSES
utilities, alarm monitoring
$10,580
TOTAL OPERATIONAL COST
$49,789
TOTAL Staff + Operating
$713,309
ESTIMATED OPERATING REVENUE
TOTAL OPERATIONAL REVENUE
Participants Avg Daily Fee
28
$12.50
57
$2.50
(This does not include fees for Probation)
$179,763
ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSE SUPPLEMENT
TOTAL OPERATIONAL EXPENSE SUPPLEMENT
($533,547)
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐11 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 3 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs and Probation (Continued)
Building Space Needs
ENTRY CONTROL
Entry Vestibule Visitors and Staff
Reception Counter
Lobby Waiting Intake Room/Admissions
Case Manager/Social Worker
Visitor Toilets
Non‐Contact Visiting
Contact Visiting
Attorney Visiting
Occupant Entry
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
ADMINISTRATION
QNTY
Visitor Waiting
1@
Superintendent Office
1@
Private Office w/conference space for four Assistant Superintendant
1@
Accounting
Office / Files
1@
Administrative Staff
Workstations
3@
Case Managers 3 workstations
3@
Share Program Conference Room
1@
Job Procurement Manager
1@
Assistant
1@
Conference Room
1@
Security
Correctional Supervisor Office
2@
Correctional Officers ‐ 3 WS
3@
(Total staff of 5 Officer I & 5 Officer II)
Control Room
1@
File/Copy Space
1@
Case Records/Historic Files
1@
Chief Probation Officer
1@
Private Office w/conference space for two
Senior Probation Officer
1@
Private Office
Probation Officers
Private Office
11 @
Treatment Room/Clinic
1@
Staff/Public Restrooms
Male accessible
2@
Female accessible
2@
Staff Break Room
1@
Janitors Closet
1@
8
6
12
8
10
6
12
8
8
10
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
64
72
180
80
150
96
180
160
160
100
SIZE
6 x 12 =
12 x 18 =
72
216
12 x
15 =
180
12 x
15 =
180
6 x
8 =
144
9
12
12
10
14
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
8
12
15
10
15
8
15
10
10
10
12
12
18
12
20
=
=
=
=
=
324
144
216
120
280
10 x
6 x
12 =
8 =
240
144
8
12
12
12
x
x
x
x
12
18 =
15
15 =
96
216
180
180
12 x
12 =
144
10 x
10 x
1320
120
8
8
12
5
12 =
12 =
=
x 12 =
x 15 =
x 15 =
x
6 =
sub‐total
192
240
180
30
6400
2240
8650 Square Feet @
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
ADMINISTRATION TOTAL
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐12 ‐ $175
$1,513,750
Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008 UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS‐CLARKE COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT UPDATE APPENDIX 2 Option 3 ‐ Diversion Center, 50 Beds with Programs and Probation (Continued)
Building Space Needs (Continued)
PARTICIPANT SPACES
Holding Cell
Strip Search
Activity/Day Room @ 25sf/participant
Food prep and serving
Laundry
PARTICIPANT HOUSING
12 Bed Unit
Toilets
2t+2u+3s/3t+3S
Showers
2 units
Linen & Supplies
Janitor Closet
Properties
2
2
2
1
1
@
@
@
@
@
4
4
4
1
1
2
@
@
@
@
@
@
7
8
25
18
12
x
x
X
X
X
7
10
24
35
18
=
=
=
=
=
#
12 x 42 =
11 x
9 =
6 x
9 =
x 220 =
x 70 =
x 150 =
sub‐total
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
PARTICIPANT TOTAL
PROGRAM SPACE
Life Skills Training Room (10‐15 people)
Group Counseling Space(s) (8+10 people)
Day Reporting (share program space)
Enlarged Waiting Computer Lab
Job Search Library/Legal Library
Check‐in Counter
Large Program space (15 ‐ 20 people)
Small counseling/attorney (one‐to‐one)
Medium Counseling (8‐10 people)
Drug screening restroom
Gross Circulation & MEP @ 35%
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
15
15
12
10
10
12
10
16
10
15
8
x 20 =
x 20 =
x 15 =
x 20 =
x 15 =
x 18 =
x
6 =
x 24 =
x 14 =
x 18 =
x
6 =
sub‐total
PPROGRAM SPACE TOTAL
98
160
1200
630
216
2016
396
216
220
70
300
5522
1933
7475 Square Feet @
300
300
180
200
150
216
60
384
140
540
48
1375 Square Feet @
481
1875 Square Feet @
TOTAL BUILDING INCLUDING PROGRAM SPACE 18000 Square Feet
$160
$1,196,000
$170
$233,750
$170
$318,750
$3,028,500
Carter Goble Associates, Inc. ‐ A2‐13 ‐ Final Report Draft ‐ July 2008