Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1982.09.09 - 13950! = "T 11 iscellaneous Resolution: 82276 September 9, 1982 BY: HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE - Marilynn E. Gosling, Chairperson IN RE: OAKLAND COUNTY CHILD CARE FUND BUDGET FOR 1982-83 TO: THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: WHEREAS pursuant to provisions of Act 280 of the Public Acts of 1975, Oakland County is required to develop and submit a plan and budget for the funding of foster care services to the Office of Children and Youth Services, Department of Social Services, annually; and WHEREAS the Oakland Camnty Probate Court, Juvenile Division and the Oakland County Department of Social Services have developed the attached foster care services bu --,;et for the State's fiscal year, October 1, 1932 through September 30, 1983; and WHEREAS the Health and Human Resources Committee has reviewed this budget and recommends its submission to the State office. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Cc71missioners authorize submission of the 1982-83 Oakland County Child Care Fund Budget to the State Office of Children and Youth Services, Department of ciai Services. Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Health and Human Resources Committee, move the adoption of the foregoing resolution. Mat`-flynnai. Gosling, ChairpersoD,1 Health and Human Resources Comrattee OAYLAND COUNTY FISCAL YEAR 1982-83 PROGRAM PLAN AND BUDGET CONTACT PERSON COURT: E. KOONCE PHONE: 856-0256 Court, Division Juvenile Probate COUNTY CHILD CARE BUDGE DSS: J. wAurim PHONE: 33-121:81 TYPE OF CARE I. FAMILY POSTER CARE II. INSTITUTIONAL CARE III. IN-HOME CARE IV. INDEPENDENT LIVING V. ADOPTIVE SUBSIDY VI. STATE WARD CHARGEBACK VII. BASIC GRANT A. County Program B. County Share of Joint Program SUBTOTAL ANTICIPATE: CREDITS (Subtract from Subtotal) ANTICIPATED EXPENDITURE/CREDIT 436,626. 7,400,769. 160,097. 13,665. 7,374. 811,025. 0. a. 8,829,556. 1,194,307. TOTAL COUYIY CHILD CARE $ 7,635,249. BUDGET DEVELOPMENT CERTIFICATION The er-signed have participated in developing the program budget presented Presidinz Judg6 of / SignetC Co6i7Ity Director l of S0CiEIIT Services I certify that the budget submitted above represents an anticipated gross expenditure for the fiscal year October 1, 19 thru September 30, 19 . Signed Chairperson, Board of Commissioners ! DSS-2091 (Rev. 5-79) Previous edition obsolete Date OAKLAND 8-18-82 347,986. 25,534. 45,524 15,512, 816. 1,300 19,898. 2,494 500. /1.'16,626. 26,116. 247- 2,523 County Child Care: Budget Detail Page 1 TYPE OF CARE COUNTY CHILD CARE-DETAIL BUDGET For Office of Children and Youth Services F.Y. October 1, 1982 - September 30, 1983 County Date Submitted Annual (total antici- Anticipated Gross Cost Rated exp.) . Days Care L FAMILY FOSTER CARE A. Directly Supervised 1. Court Supervised -Foster Care Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments 2. County DSS Supervised -Foster Care Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments B. Private Agency Family Foster Homes 1. Court Placed -Foster Care and Administrative Rate Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments 2. County DSS Placed -Foster Care and Administrative Rate Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments FAMILY FOSTER CARE TOTAL 3,895 $ 224,805. $ 219,954. 731. 3,770 0 4,120. 125 0 0. County Child Care: Budget Detail PaGe 2 Annual Gross Anticipated Cost Days Care TYPE OF CARE II. INSTITUTIONAL CARE A. Private Institution 1. Court Placed in State .-Foster Care Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments 2. Court Placed Out-of-State -Foster Care Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments 3. County DSS Placed In-State -Foster Care Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments 4. County DSS Place Out-of- State -Foster Care Payments -Non-Scheduled Payments Subtotal Private Institution 4 :MS-2092 Rev. 5-79) 1. De Vyricy ciig. & "A" Bldg.) 2 ' Gr(WM!litYgd Other CV) 3, Shelter Care Facility 4. Other Subtotal Court Operated Institutions 1,715,650. 4,954,582, 505,732. 7,175,964. 28,835 67,270 14,564 312 110,669 73 1.95 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (,)unty Child Care; Budget Detail rage 3 YYPE OF CARE Annual Cross (total antici , Number Cost pated exp.) of Beds Anticipated Days Care B. Court Operated Institutions C. County D.S.S. Operated Facilities 1. Croup Care Facility 2. Shelter Care Facility 3. Other Subtotal County D.S.S. Operated Facilities INSTITUTIONAL CARE TOTAL $7,175,964. DSS-2092 (Rev. 5-70) Annual Gross Cost TYPE OF CARE 160,097. 1,095 13,665, 0 0 0 0 7,374 . 56 children: 1,260 days of care 7,374. 811,025. o. 8,829,556. toaransalaussameamitarse 941. X. TOTAL COUNTY CHILD CARR (subtract credits from Grand Total) ,2092 (Rev. 5 -79) 7,635,249. AnLicip?:IL(A (total antic!- Number of Children Anticipated Dated exp.) in Care/Service Days Care III. IN-HOME CARE SERVICE COMPONENTS TOTAL $ 160,097. TOTAL IN-HOME CARE IV. INDEPENDENT LIVING (Court) V. ADOPTION SUBSIDY (Pre-adoptive care) A. Support 260 B. Medical C. Foster Care/Appeal Period TOTAL ADOPTION SUBSIDY VI. STATE WARD CHARGEBACK VII. COUNTY SHARE OF JOINT COUNTY BASIC GRANT SINGLE COUNTY BASIC GRANT TOTAL BASIC GRANT VIII. GRAND TOTAL I thru VII IX. ANTICIPATED CREDITS Telephone-Camp Oakland Veterans Administration Social Security Per Diem Receipts Governmental Grants Parent Pay State School Aide TOTAL CREDITS 1,194,307. 160,097 160,097 I) C) D) E) F) Subtotal IHC - Court Subtotal IHC DSS TOTALS INC • K_701 C.wvieNsig inn nhsr.)9ete County IN-HOME CARE SUMMARY OAKLAND List all service components which make up the IHC program and specify the requested informetion for each. , I CCF Other Put- Gross TOT CO (Service Component) (adm. unit) ExpenditurE lic Funding Expenditure A) AL ST Juvenile Court 160,097 l NOKE 160,097. IL For service component listed above, complete a separate IN-HONE CARE BUD7 DETAIL, (DSS 2094) filling in the appropriate budget items. (function) Supervisor (hrs./wk.) 40 4-Child Welfare Worker 11 Casework 85,656. 160 41,857. 155,45. :Ffice Srplies ?-. tir- 3. 7'her Cam=niee=ions Men-be,--sht:, Dues &Publ. (basis (total cost) 1,000. - 75. 2UT 1,323. 140. 110, 1,690. 114. Total Program Support 4,652. IN-HOME CARE BUDGET DETAIL Service Component A. PERSONNEL (Employeesof Court or DSS) I. Salary and Wages (name) 1-Child Welfare Worker/ Administrative Unit: DSS Tri Court ri (total cost) 27,932. 9 2.: Fringe Benefits (specify) (36.857 of salary cost) Total Personnel B. PROAM SUPPORT (For Employees Identified lin I. Travel (Transpertation) . (purpose) (rate/mile), See clients .25 Travel & conference 2. Supplies and Materials Postage "A" above) (est. # miles) 4,000 & rate) C. S7RVIC 7 S Tndividual Consultants name) or Providers (rate/unit) 1(total units/contract) (total cost) 0 2. Contracting Organization a. Closed-end contracts (name) 0 purchased units) 160,097 Mi2gMlifilWAWIEWAMVX b. Per unit contracts (name) krateiuniti (est, D. Total Contractual rik.).., II LUUL L 4, 1 1-1 I i FL1 1 4 J anticipated avurciye LUST. (type of service) # units tobe of each (total cost) provided service unit Total Non-Scheduled Total Service Component Cost E. Add Totals for A, B, C, & D above 160,097 F. If you plan to fund any portion of this service component with other public revenue (including other Child Care Funds or Basic Grant monies), specify the following: (source) I (purpose) (amount) Total Public Revenue . 0 G. Subtract Total Public Revenue from Total Service Component Cost NET ANTICIPATED IHC MATCHABLE EXPENDITURE DSS-2094 (Rey. 5-79) (Back) 32. n,*a Family Care: 00 - 05 07 - 12 13 lq S5,95 $7.35 $110.00 •$170.00 $245.00 $45.00 $73.00 $91.00 OAKLAND COUNTY .DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES 1982-83 Budget, Child Care Fund Q.S.S. Sub-Account SECTION VI, General Narrative 27. N/A 28, N/A 29. N/A 30, N/A 31. Nf=1, Schedule (State Rates) Foster AGE rPr)UP PER DIEI1RATE MAXIMUM INITIAL SEMI-ANNUAL CLOTHINC CLOTHING ALLOWANCE WHERE APPLICABLE Indeper:tent Living Rate (State Rate) $9.70 Per Diem 33, JW:ac 6-25-82 Oakland County Probate Court, Juvenile Division Child Care Fund Narrative 1982-83 Budget VI. General Narrative 27. Given the current availability or lack of services and resources that benefit children in your county (or multi-county area), what are the most serious service needs of children within the county area? To what extent does the Child Care Fund meet the needs of children already within or in jeopardy of coming within the "juv- enile justice system" in the county or multi-county area? If In-Home Care and/or Basic Grant programs are budgeted in the county's (les') annual Child Care Fund plan, how do these programs dovetail into out-of-home Child Care Fund activities? To what extent doe these programs fill "juvenile justice service" gaps within the county (ies) or area? In Oakland County local resources are provided for foster care of children through both public and private auspices. Child Care Fund expenditures in the County are controlled through the Juven- ile Court. Detention, shelter care, treatment programs and foster care homes for children are provided. Under In-Home Care, the Juvenile Court provides programming for Status Offenders. The purpose of the program is to reduce the number of status offenders requiring detention pending hearing and reduce the length of out-of-home placement. 28. If you are currently operating programs funded by Child Care Fund monies and grants from other governmental or private sources, state the percentage of funding from each source. Not applicable. If you are currently funding programs with other than Child Care Fund monies, but are anticipating the use of the Child Care Fund to continue funding such prograMs in the future; or, if a program described under item 28 above is not included in your narrative for In-Home Care or Basic Grant, provide a description of such programs. Attach such descriptions to this document. Your response to this request willi allow the office to determine whether the future funding of such programs meets In-Home Care or Basic Grant requirements. Not applicable. -2- 30. If your county operates any institutional facility (treatment, secure detention, non-secure detention, group or attention homes, multi-purpose facility, etc.) describe the services provided in each. Please state the bed space capacity of each. Presently, the court operates an active foster care and adoptions unit, the Oakland County Children's Village with (1) a detention facility (capacity 73 beds, 52 beds in Bldg. "J" and 21 beds in Bldg. "A" South for girls' detention), (2) a Shelter Care facility (capacity 44 beds) and (3) five other units which would be util- ized for what more commonly would be called group care facilities, and are referred to here as rehabilitation units. These rehabili- tation units, combined with the programs at Camp Oakland of Boys' Ranch, Girls' Ranch, Adams HOse and Work Education, provide an additional bed capacity for 195: children. It is not uncommon for youngsters to move from detention or shelter care into one of these treatment or rehabilitation programs. 31. If your county operates a facility that is used for Child Care Fund reimbursed and non-Child Care Fund reimbursed services (e.g., to house probation staff or courtrooms), describe the formula that is used to prorate the costs of operating the facility (e.g., fuel, rent, electricity, maintenance). The Adopt:cns and Foster Care unit is located in the Administra- tive Win; of the Oakland County Children's Village. The county's 1982 assessment is $4.52 per square food for the office area of 4400 square feet, at a total amount update of $ 19,888. This rente° rate incorporates costs for maintenance, fuel, elec- tricity, sec. As was noted last year, there is a concern by the court trse provisions should be made for the inclusion of these and other administrative costs for operations of the Foster Home unit in eee Child Care Fund budget. The primary goal of the unit is to provide non-institutional care for children who are unable to remeeir, in their own homes, consistent with present day de- emphasis on institutional care. Attach a schedule of regular rates paid for family foster care and Hying. If State rates are used, please indicate. State rates for foster care and independent living are used, unless exeeptional rates are approved in those cases requiring special care. If a county wishes to establish a group or shelter home program in a licensed family foster home, a program description, subsidy amount, what costs the per diem pays, must be submitted with the annual plan and budget. When the program is reviewed and approved, individual case documentation for approval of special rate foster care provided in these homes will not be needed. The following program elements should be described: I. How the family foster care licensed group-shelter home pro- gram fits into the total foster care delivery system. H. A Administrative B. -Staff C. Parent Intake and Release Criteria. IV, Program Description. V. Financial. A. Per Diem - Detailed B. Subsidy - Detailed C. Copy of Contract Not applicable 111. IN-HOME CARE AND BASIC GRANT NARRATIVE INSTRUCTIONS VII. IN-HOME CARE AND BASIC GRANT NARRATIVE !INSTRUCTIONS For each in-home care or basic grant service component described the following: 34. The purpose of each service component includes: a. What the problem is and how the court or DSS is measuring the extent of the problem and the needs: The court recognizes the national concern raised from the placement of children who come to the attention of the court on status .offenses (home and school truancy and home and school incorrigibility). This national concern culminated in the 1974 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. As a result of this act in 1978 through 1980 the Oakland County Juvenile Court received federal funds to try to divert status offenders from detention. Since August of 1980 the Oakland County Juvenile Court has received matching funds throuh the Child Care Fend In-Home Care component to continue some services in this recard. This proposal requests continuation the efforts to avoid detention as well as an effort to reduce a number of states offenders placed on a full order out of their home. The eceet views the detention and placement of status offenders out of eome as a problem because it produces a burden on court resoeeees. When families approach the court for status offenses rhey're usually seeking an immediate solution for these very stressful home situations. The court feels that if we do not limit the detention of status offenders we will increase request for court involvement. If we increase the request for court involvement we increase the possibility that the child will be removed from home. It cc ears also that when this type of an offender is removed from home the length of their out of home stay can be longer than that of a youngster coming to the attention of the court on a delinquent type offense, basically because the bond between the parent and child has been broken or severly strained. In the addendums to this report you will find a graph demonstrating the number of status offenders detained from 1975 through the end of 1980. It is easily observed from the trends illustrated in the graph that the number of status offenders detained has fallen significantly since 1978, the inception of our alternative programs for the detainable status offender. they develop into major crisis. This approach therefore allows more reality pragmatic issues to be used to motivate change. 8. Will force the bond between the parent and child. it will produce commitment and reduce abandonment. The ultimate objective is to establish or re-establish a level of mutual responsibility found in a relationship. c. What the goals and objectives are for each service component: The general goal of the Status Offender Alternative Program is to avoid an out of home placement whether at the point of detention or at the point of disposition. If the status offender is detained, our objective is to reduce the length of that detention. More specifically our objectives are: 1. To maintain the level of detention no greater than 79% of the 1975 rate. That is 125 detentions annually. 2. To reduce the length of detention for cases detained. 3. To avoid out of home placements in at least half the status offenders referred to this program as an alternative for disposition. 35. The effect that the desired changes will have on the county's other Juvenile Justice Services, (for example a measureable reduction in foster care as a direct result of in-home care programming). a. Oakland County will continue to contribute to the state's goal• of reducing the detention of status offenders and therefore assisting the state achieving compliance to the 1374 Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act. b. Program will reduce Children's Village placements. c. By removing status offender cases when out of home placement was considered as part of a dispositional order, current probation staff will be able to concentrate on more serious delinquent type offenders. d. Since a high percentage of status offenders coming to the steert:on of the court are females, the primary program effect wMi be on Children's Village Programs for females. e. An effective program component will allow further adjustments in Children's Village pregramming and will reduce such adjustment problems as Children's Village truancies and intraprogram transfers. f. An effective program component will reduce further legal actions that would require more hearings, attorney fees, and inconveniences to parents as well as to the legal system. The second table was developed from the rates of detention in 1975. This table suggests how many days in detention would have occurred based upon the 1375 rate if it was not for the efforts made. Although the previous effort has been on the detention of status offenders the number of status offenders admitted from a court hearing to Children's Village facilities has also seen a substantial decline. As pointed out in a proceeding paragraph the decline in placements from a court hearing are probably related to the court's de-emphasizing itself as a source for immediate relief from the problems created by status offenders. Even with the noted decline the court feels that it needs to increase services to the population being placed out of the home so that an even further reduction will occur. b. How needs of the target population will be effected by the service component: Based on our experience with status offenders, the underlying probleMs bringing them to the attention of the Juvenile Court rest within the family interactions. in some instances the breakdowns can be seen in the initial socialization process. In the majority of these cases the breakdown seems more related to crisis situations brought on by family changes, that it is death, divorce, separation or adoption or developmental issues. Based pn our position in this we feel the service component will have the following effects on the parent/child relationship. I. Will keep parent and child i n volved in the planning -eceec=, and in control of their own destiny. 2. provide an opportunity to increase problem solving aez-eaches. This means reduced controlling epproaches, e-reeets or unhealthy emotional tactics. 3.Will work to keep the responsibility for the problem resolution on the family. 4. Will provide a realistic view of what one can and cannot control. It will remove the notion that problems can be seived by magical solutions through the court, through a therapist or through a boyfriend or peer group. 5. Will eliminate feeling S of helplessness for parents and hopelessness for the child. The services will be aimed to providing support for the child and parent. 6. Will assist families to get the most appropriate community resources for their problems. 7. Will provide more access to third party involvement so that there is some objectivity to sort out problems before 36. The specific services that will be delivered which will remedy or reduce the problem: a. Crisis intervention will be the primary intervention technique used to provide services at all case levels. To avoid the detention of the detainable status offender, it will be in most instances the primary source of service. When cases are referred to the in-home care component as a dispositional alternative, it will be an available approach to both child and family to reduce stress, to provide support, to demonstrate to families and children that we can grow from problems. There is a commitment to work problems out. b. intensive casework support. This service will be available at a pre-adjudicative level if the complaint on the child is authorized for official court action. The program continues to maintain a high priority in avoiding the authorization of complaints. It is felt that the intensive casework support be more readily used in the group of children served as a dispositionai alternative to out of home care. By intensive casework support we mean no less than two face-to-face meetings with family on a weekly basis. Where possible we would also like to include student interns to provide more direct service to a child and the regular program staff concentrate on the family interactions. c. Famil eounseling. For those children served as a dispositional alternative to out of home care, staff will establish a minimal bi-weekly meetings where the child and parents will meet to discuss issues and improved aommunications. Emphasis on the family meetings is to improve problem solving skills. e. Group counseling. A grouD approach with parents and children will be considered when the population of both is sufficient to implement this maahod. The group will serve as a support system for the parent and the child, an opportunity to educate families and an opportunity to practice what has been learned. a Use cf community services. The program will strive to better utilize all existing community services. For the pre-adjudicated population served, the objective is that the, community services will meet the needs of the family and child and therefore avoid official court involvement. For the child served as a dispositional alternative to out of home placement, anticipated community services will provide folloW-up services after cases have been terminated from the in-home are component. In general the services listed above will be available to all cases served by this component. The length and the intensity of the services will be determined by the legal status of the case. The staff assigned to this unit will be available to provide services beyond the Monday through Friday schedule and beyond the 8:30 to 5:00 time frame. All staff will have a minimum of a Bachelor's Degree and have already have had several years experience in serving youth. 37. The operating procedures for each service component include: a. Client selection process and client eligibility criteria. Children served by the Status Offender Alternatives are children in risk of being Irernoved from home because of the intensity of the family conflicts as apposed to the seriousnes of the offense. This criteria would include children involved in court strictly for status offenses as well as some children involved in court on a non-status charge but where the home condition is a primary factor determining the need for an out of home placement. Children served by this unit can be at a different level of legal involvement in the court process. Services will be provi d ed as long as a childi comes under a court order. Cases acceotee - in the in-home component will have had as a minimum a preliminary hearing verifying that if it were not for this component said child would have been placed outside of the home. b. Recoee eeeping requirements. Proceam component staff will keep records of all children scree -eo for the service. Children accepted into the program will eequire initial contact forms, copies of complaints, and copies of legal reports. The program will use state quaterly reports to document specific objectives and progress towards these ocectives. The various forms for use in this component are ava:;able at request for review. EesiCes documenting cases Served, the program staff maintain daily records describing a variety of community contacts requesting services. Provide a contract and monitoring mechanisms. Not applicable at this time. ,-L Case review. procedure. Including frequency, progress indicaters, client termination criteria and follow-up procedure. C , Cases will be reviewed by program supervisor at opening and monthly after the opening. A case staffing approach will be utilized by staff on a monthly basis for cases presenting particular problems. Supervisor will also work with staff on a more immediate basis when need requires this. At closure all cases will be carefully reviewed by supervisor. The review includes a reading of all reports and follow-up summaries. Supervisor also keeps track of cases in regard to detention, court involvement, and where the child resides at closure. Progress in achieving objectives will be indicated by the following behaviors in the report: 1. The amount of interaction between parent and child. 2. The amount of open communication between parent and child end the worker. 3. The reduction in avoidance behavior such as running away from home. 4. The commitment between parent and child to continue working on the problems.1 5. The identification by parent and child of their role in t'a conflicts within their home. 6. The voluntary participation of the family in community agencies. 7. The development by the family of specific steps to achieve their objectives. A child will be terminated from the in-home care project when: Parents and children have developed a plan that can be implemented without the need for court intervention. 2. Child is returned to court and is placed out of home. Child and parent, after having been served by the i-,:ensive services, have demonstrated improvement and ability to relate, communicate and solve problems. The child at this time will be placed on a regular probation order or dismissed from court. /sb 7/22/32 38. The criteria that will be used to evaluate the program's ability to address the problems and purpose stated in 34 above. The criteria should be measureable examples for criteria is x number of clients served, the measure would be how many clients are actually served. a. The program will assist the court in maintaining the detention rate at 75% of the 1975 figures. b. Based on 1981 referrals, the program will provide services to 200 children eligible for detention or pre-adjudicative. 1. At this detention level our objective is to avoid detention, throughout our contact with the cases for 140 of the 200 cases proposed to be served. 2. At this detention level our objective is to reduce the length of detention to no longer than the second preliminary hearing in 40 of the 60 cases detained or about 2/3 of the cases. c. The program will provide services to 60 cases as an alternative to out of home disposition. 1. Our objective for cases served as a dispositional alternative to out of home placement is to ultimately avoid the placement in at least 30 or 1/2 of the cases served. The service delivers (agency or individual who could best provide the services to meet the program and clinic goals and objectives) Not applicable. 40. Submit copes of all contracts that are private or public providers once they ere assigned. Not applicable. If a contract calls for the purchase of services on a unit basis explain the method used to determine the unit cost. Not applicable. If this is an ongoing program, indicate the previous source and the amount of public funding and the Use, if any are private funds. Status Offender Program was previously funded by Child Care Fund, In-home Care Program. Prior to the inception of Child Care Funds similar services were provided through a grant under the 1574 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. 1st 1st 1st ADDENDUM I PREADJUD1CATED ADMISSIONS TO CHILDREN'S VILLAGE OF STATUS OFFENDERS BY QUARTER 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1st 1975 Alternative to Secure Detention is implemented 1st 1st 1st 1976 1971 1978 1979 1'111(1 HI11 , 1982 1st ADDENDUM il Expected vs Actual Days of Detention for 1981 The expected days in detention was established from the actual pre-adjudicated detention of status offenders in 1975. The days in detention were categorized by the length of the detention from one, to thirty days. Any detention beyond 30 days was placed in the "30 Day" category because lengthier detentions usually included children waiting placement after adjudication. To establish the expected number of children for each category, the number of children in each category was divided by the total number of pre-adjudicated detentions (418) in 1975. Therefore, 48 children were detained for one day, divided by 418 equals the rate of detention for this category at 11.5%. For 1981 program year, the 11.5% was multiplied by the total number of children served, 219. The expected number of children for one day would be 25. The following table describes the expected days in detention compared to the actual days. The actual days was accumulated at the closure of our cases. Length of Percentage No. of Children Expected Actual No. Actual Days in of Population Expected Based on Days in of Children Days in Detent:on 2E_LLIatiy Pop. of 219* Served Detention in Detention Detention 1 11.4 25 25 12 12 2 15.0 33 66 20 40 3 8.1 18 54 13 39 4 8.5 19 76 5 20 5 c .- .)R 21 105 13 65 6 8.6 19 114 5 30 7 8.8 19 133 1 7 8 2.1 5 40 3 24 9 2.4 5 45 0 0 10 .., 1 10 0 0 11 .7 1 11 0 0 12 1.2 3 36 0 0 13 .5 1 13 1 13 14 1.2 3 42 0 0 15 1.7 4 60 0 0 16 1.9 4 64 2 32 17 2.4 5 85 1 17 18 2.1 4 72 1 18 19 1.2 3 57 1 19 20 .' 1 20 0 0 21 2.1 4 84 0 0 22 a ...., 2 44 2 44 23 1.2 3 69 1 23 24 .7 1 24 0 0 25 .2 1 25 0 0 26 .5 1 26 0 0 27 - .7 1 27 1 27 28 .2 1 28 1 28 29 .5 1 29 0 0 30 + 4.5 10 300 25 750 106% 219 1,784 108* 1,208 *From the 219 children served, 111 children were not detained and are not excluded in the coluTn, "Actual Number of Children in Detention." ALLEN - T County Clerk/Register of Deeds #82276 September 9, 1982 Moved by Gosling supported by Fortino the resolution be adopted. AYES: Calandra, Doyon, Fortino, Gabler, Geary, Gosling, Hobart, Jackson, Lanni, McDonald, Moffitt, Montante, Moore, Olsen, Page, Perinoff, Pernick, Price, Whitlock, Wilcox, Aaron, Caddell, Cagney. (23) NAYS: None. (0) A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution was adopted. STATE OF MICHIGAN) COUNTY OF OAKLAND) i, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland and having a seal, do hereby certify that I have compared the annexed copy of Miscellaneous Resolution ft 82276 adopted by the !Oakland County Board of Commissioners at their meeting held on September 9, 1982 with the orginial record thereof now remaining in my office, and that it is a true and correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole thereof. In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County at Pontiac, Michigan this 9th day of Sept2=m1Der /—) 19 82