Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Resolutions - 2014.11.19 - 21603
REPORT (MISC. #14267) November 19, 2014 BY: Human Resources Committee, John Scott, Chairperson IN RE: 52/1 DISTRICT COURT (NOVI) — FY 2015 DRUG COURT GRANT - ACCEPTANCE To the Oakland County Board of Commissioners Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: The Human Resources Committee, having reviewed the above referenced resolution on November 12, 2014, reports with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. Chairperson, on behalf of the Human Resources CommitteeIlove the acceptance of the foregoing report. HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE Motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote with Hatchett and Runestad absent. MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION #14267 November 19, 2014 BY: PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE, BILL DVVYER, CHAIRPERSON IN RE: 52/1 DISTRICT COURT (NOVI) — FY 2015 DRUG COURT GRANT — ACCEPTANCE To the Oakland County Board of Commissioners Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: WHEREAS the 52nd District Court, Division I (Novi) applied for and was awarded a grant with the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO), Michigan Drug Court Grant Program (MDCGP) effective October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015; and WHEREAS the court has created a hybrid version of the Sobriety Court program to assist in addressing the problems specifically related to Opiate, increasing use of alcohol and illegal drugs, use increasing recidivism, rising systems costs, and an increase in jail days ordered; and WHEREAS the total program funding is $148,012, consisting of $64,998 in grant funding from SCAO, plus General Fund support of $83,014, with no required cash match; and WHEREAS the $83,014 General Fund support consists of $43,650 operating support, $28,269 personnel support and $11,095 transfer from General Fund expense line item (Account 731185); and WHEREAS the grant award of $64,998 will provide partial funding for the continuation of a special revenue (SR) full-time eligible (FTE) Probation Officer I position (#3020205-11415) to monitor the Opiate Court caseload; and WHEREAS 52nd District Court, Division I (Novi) has agreed to transfer $11,095 of one of their general fund expense line items (Account 731185) to cover the balance of the position cost; and WHEREAS this grant is conditioned upon continued interpretation of the contract consistent with the July 31, 2014 letter from the Michigan State Court Administrative Office (SCAO), providing that assurance #3 of this year's grant application and agreement shall not be construed as a mandate for future funding of the program from the funding unit, said letter attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS the grant award has been approved by the County Executive's review process in accordance with the Board of Commissioners Grant Acceptance Procedures. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners accepts the 2015 Michigan Drug Court Grant Program (MDCGP) from the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) in the amount of $64,998, for the period of October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to continue one (1) SR funded FTE Probation Officer I position in the Probation Unit (#3020205-11415) and to transfer $11,095 from one of 52nd District Court, Division I (Novi) general fund expense line items (Account 731185) to cover the balance of the position. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairperson of the Board of Commissioners is authorized to execute the contract agreement and that the chairperson may approve amendments and extensions up to fifteen (15%) percent variance from the award, consistent with the original agreement as approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that acceptance of this grant does not obligate the County to any future commitment, and continuation of the special revenue position is contingent upon future levels of grant funding. Chairperson, on behalf of the Public Services Committee, I move the adoption of the foregoing resolution. PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE Motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote with Bosnic absent. GRANT REVIEW SIGN OFF 52/1 District Court GRANT NAME: FY 2015 Michigan Drug Court Grant Program FUNDING AGENCY: State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSON: Suzanne Garrett (248) 305-6071 STATUS: Grant Acceptance DATE: October 15, 2014 Pursuant to Misc. Resolution #13180, please be advised the captioned grant materials have completed internal grant review. Below are the returned comments. The captioned grant materials and grant acceptance package (which should include the Board of Commissioners Liaison Committee Resolution, the grant agreement/contract, Finance Committee Fiscal Note, and this Sign Off email containing grant review comments) may be requested to be place on the appropriate Board of Commissioners' committee(s) for grant acceptance by Board resolution. DEPARTMENT REVIEW Department of Management and Budget: Approved. — Laurie Van Pelt (10/2/2014) Department of Human Resources: FIR Approved (Needs Committee) — Lori Taylor (10/2/2014) Risk Management and Safety: Approved by Risk Management. — Robert Erlenbeck (10/2/2014) Corporation Counsel: There appear to be no unresolved legal issues requiring action at this time. However, please be aware that section 8.01 of the contract requires that SCAO must be notified prior to the disclosure of proprietary information required by FO1A or court order. — Carmen Lyon (10/14/2014) COMPLIANCE The grant agreement and assurances reference specific federal and state regulations. Below is a list of the specifically cited compliance related documents for this grant. Drug Treatment Courts: The Ten Key Components http://www.oip.usdoj gov/B JA/grant/Dna gCourts/DefiningDC.pdf Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (42 CFR Part 2) http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_02/42cfr2 02.html Michigan — Conflict of Interest - Contracts of Public Servants with Public Entities — "Act 317 of 1968" http://www.legi slature. mi. gov/fuq3lxgeltnarj5z55 z2uiwv45)/mileg.aspx7page=getobj ect&obj ectname=m cl -Act-317-of-1968&queryid=14761946 Michigan — Standards of Conduct for Public Officers and Employees (Act 196 of 1973) http://www.legislature.mi.govk S(30eoca2irf3taz55n2klzhns))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectNanie= rn c1-15-341 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: VanPeit. Laurie "West, Catherine"; "3 Jie Secontine"; "Lori Taylor; "Pat Davis" "Garrett, Suzanne"; "Black., Alexandra"; "Falardeau. Nancy"; "Scer, Bonnie" RE: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance Thursday, October 02, 2019 11:20:50 AM Approved. From: West, Catherine [mailto:westca@oakgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 9:20 AM To: Julie Secontine; Laurie VanPelt; Lori Taylor; Pat Davis Cc: 'Garrett, Suzanne'; Black, Alexandra; 'Falardeau, Nancy'; Scalf, Bonnie Subject: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance GRANT REVIEW FORM TO: REVIEW DEPARTMENTS — Laurie Van Pelt — Lori Taylor—Julie Secontine — Pat Davis RE: GRANT CONTRACT REVIEW RESPONSE — 52-1 District Court FY 2015 Drug Court Grant State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) Attached to this email please find the grant document(s) to be reviewed. Please provide your review stating your APPROVAL, APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATION, or DISAPPROVAL, with supporting comments, via reply (to all) of this email. Time Frame for Returned Comments: October 9, 2014 GRANT INFORMATION Date: October 2, 2014 Operating Department: 52-1 District Court Department Contact: Suzanne Garrett Contact Phone: (248) 305-6071 Document Identification Number: 02739 REVIEW STATUS: Acceptance — Resolution Required Funding Period: October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015 New Facility/Additional Office Space Needs: None IT Resources (New Computer Hardware / Software Needs or Purchases): None M/WBE Requirements: No Funding Continuation/New: Continuation Application Total Project Amount: 145,874 Prior Year Total Funding: $75,000 From To: Cc: Subject: Date: Taylor. Lori "West. Catherine"; "Julie Secontine"; "Laurie VanPelt"; "Pat Davis" "Garrett Suzanne"; "Black. Alexandra"; "Falardeau, Nancy"; "Scalf. Bonnie" RE: GRANT REVIEW: 5211 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance Thursday, October 02, 2014 10:41:02 AM HR Approved (Needs Committee) Lori Taylor Manager-Human Resources Recruitment & Workforce Planning Oaldand County Michigan 2100 Pontiac Lake Road Waterford, MI 48328 raylorloftoakgov.com www.oakgov.comijobs Phone: 248-858-0548 Fax: 248-858-8391 From: West, Catherine [mailto:westca@oakgov.corn] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 9:20 AM To: Julie Secontine; Laurie VanPelt; Lori Taylor; Pat Davis Cc: 'Garrett, Suzanne'; Black, Alexandra; 'Falardeau, Nancy'; Scalf, Bonnie Subject: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance GRANT REVIEW FORM TO: REVIEW DEPARTMENTS — Laurie Van Pelt — Lori Taylor —Julie Secontine — Pat Davis RE: GRANT CONTRACT REVIEW RESPONSE — 52-1 District Court FY 2015 Drug Court Grant State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) Attached to this email please find the grant document(s) to be reviewed. Please provide your review stating your APPROVAL, APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATION, or DISAPPROVAL, with supporting comments, via reply (to all) of this email. Time Frame for Returned Comments: October 9, 2014 GRANT INFORMATION Date: October 2, 2014 Operating Department: 52-1 District Court Department Contact: Suzanne Garrett Contact Phone: (248) 305-6071 From: To: Cc; Subject: Date: Erlenbeck. Robert "West, Catherine"; "Julie Secont/ne"; "Laurie VanPelt"; "Lori Taylor"; "Pat Davis" "Garrett, Suzanne"; "Black, Alexandre; "Falardeau. Nancy"; "Scalf. Bonnie" RE: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance Thursday, October 02, 2019 2:56:54 PM Approved by Risk Management. R.E. 10/2/14. Robert Erlenbeck, Risk Management Office: 248-858-1694 Cell: 248-421-9121 Office scheduie: Monday through Thursday 7:00 to 5:30 From: Easterling, Terri [mailto:easterlingt©oakgov.corn] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 11:29 AM To: 'West, Catherine'; 'Julie Secontiner; 'Laurie VanPelt'; 'Lori Taylor'; 'Pat Davis' Cc: 'Garrett, Suzanne'; 'Black, Alexandra'; 'Falardeau, Nancy'; 'Scarf, Bonnie' Subject: RE: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance Please be advised that your request for Risk Management's assistance has been assigned to Bob Erlenbeck, (ext. 8-1694). if you have not done so already, please forward all related information, documentation, and correspondence. Also, please include Risk Management's assignment number, RM14-0355, regarding this matter. Thank you. From: West, Catherine [mailtomestcanoakgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 9:20 AM To: Julie Secontine; Laurie VanPelt; Lori Taylor; Pat Davis Cc: 'Garrett, Suzanne'; Black, Alexandra; 'Falardeau, Nancy'; Scalf, Bonnie Subject: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance GRANT REVIEW FORM TO: REVIEW DEPARTMENTS— Laurie Van Pelt — Lori Taylor —Julie Secontine — Pat Davis RE: GRANT CONTRACT REVIEW RESPONSE — 52-1 District Court FY 2015 Drug Court Grant State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) Attached to this email please find the grant document(s) to be reviewed. Please provide your review stating your APPROVAL, APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATION, or DISAPPROVAL, with supporting comments, via reply (to all) of this email. Time Frame for Returned Comments: October 9, 2014 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Lyon. Carmen "West. Catherine; "Julie Secontine"; "Laurie VanPelt"; "Lod Taylor"; "Pat Davis" "Garrett, Suzanne"; "Black, Alexandra"; "Falardeau. Nancy"; "Scalf, Bonnie" RE: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance Tuesday, October 14, 2014 3:27:15 PM There appear to be no unresolved legal issues requiring action at this time. However, please be aware that section 8.01 of the contract requires that SCA° must be notified prior to disclosure of proprietary information required by FOIA or court order. r0t,n .NT ChKGAN Carmen Lyon Assistant Corporation Counsel Department of Corporation Counsel 1200 N. Telegraph Road, Bldg. 14 East Courthouse West Wing Extension, 3rd Floor Pontiac, MI 48341 Phone Number: (248) 858-4097 Fax Number: (248) 858-1003 E-mail: ly.oncaoaligoimm PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY CLIENT COMNIVNICATION This e-mail is intended only for those persons to whom it is specifically addressed. It is confidential and is protected by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. This privilege belongs to the County of Oakland, and individual addressees are not authorized to waive or modify this privilege in any way. Individuals are advised that any dissemination, reproduction or unauthorized review of this information by persons other than those listed above may constitute a waiver of this privilege and is therefore prohibited. if you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, If you have any questions, please contact the Department of Corporation Counsel at (248) 858-0550. Thank you for your cooperation. From: West, Catherine [mailto:westca@oakgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 9:20 AM To: Julie Secontine; Laurie VanPelt; Lori Taylor; Pat Davis Cc: 'Garrett, Suzanne'; Black, Alexandra; 'Falardeau, Nancy'; Scalf, Bonnie Subject: GRANT REVIEW: 52/1 District Court - FY 2015 Drug Court Grant - Acceptance GRANT REVIEW FORM TO: REVIEW DEPARTMENTS— Laurie Van Pelt — Lori Taylor —Julie Secontine — Pat Davis RE: GRANT CONTRACT REVIEW RESPONSE — 52-1 District Court FY 2015 Drug Court Grant State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) Attached to this email please find the grant document(s) to be reviewed. Please provide your review stating your APPROVAL, APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATION, or DISAPPROVAL, with (—)nc ,(T)tarf i7!f1J tit le r Application 02448 - Fiscal Year 2015 Michigan Drug Court Grant Program (MDCGP) - Final Application 02739 - Drug Court Grant FY 2015 MDCGP Michigan Drug Court Grant Program 1MDCGP) Original Submitted 07/29/2014 10:58 AM Status: Submitted Date: Last Submitted Date: 09/25/20141:51 PM Applicant Information Primary Contact: Name:* Ms. Suzanne Garrett SaLutation First Name MleJrge Name Last Name Title: Chief Probation Officer Email:* garretts@oakgov.com Address:* 48150 Grand River Ave Address Line 2 Address Line 3 City* Novi Michigan 48374 City State/Province Postal Code/Zip Phone:" 248-305-6071 Phone Ext. Organization Information Name:* 52nd District Court First Division - Oakland County (D52-1) Organization Type: State Court Administrative Office Tax ID: Organization Website: Address:* 48150 Grand River Ave. Novi City Michigan State/Province 48374 Postal Code/Zip Phone:" Fax: 248-305-6144 248-305-5970 Ext. Application Information http ://mic o urt s. dulle ste c h.net/getApp lic ati onPrintPreview. do ?do curnentP k=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Is there an approved Local Administrative Order (LAO)? Local Administrative Order (LAO):* LAO Number: 2009-2 Is there a current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)? Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)* Yes Yes Effective Date: Expiration Date: Federal Tax ID:' What is the program capacity?* What is the current number of active participants?* How many years has the program been operational?' 03/24/2005 03/24/2015 38-6004876 156 103 13 Applicant Contact Information Select your court* People served* County to Receive the Grant Date that the program accepted or anticipates first participant' Please pick your program type' Is your program operational?* Is your court a tribal court?* Courthouse name (example: Frank Murphy Hall of Justice) Courthouse street address* Room/Floor City* State' Zip code" Judge: First Name' Judge: Last Name* Title* Judge: E-mail Address* Judge: Phone Number' Judge's Mailing Address: Street' Judge's Mailing Address: Room/Floor D52-1 (Novi) Oakland Men, Women Oakland 10/01/2013 Adult District Drug Court Yes No 52-1 District Court 48150 Grand River Ave Novi MI 48374 Brian MacKenzie Judge mackenzieb@oakgov.corn 248-305-6068 48150 Grand River Ave Ext, Judge's Mailing Address: City' Novi http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk----1404319271446 10/1/2014 JJJJJ ,VKALW IVI I Judge's Mailing Address: Zip Code* Judge 2: First Name Judge 2: Last Name Judge 2: Title Judge 2: E-mall Address Judge 2: Phone Number 48374 Robert Bondy Judge bondyr@oakgov.com 248-305-6089 Ext. Judge 2 Mailing Address: Street 48150 Grand River Ave Judge 2 Mailing Address: Room/Floor Judge 2 Mailing Address: City Novi Judge 2 Mailing Address: State Judge 2 Mailing Address: Zip 48374 Code Judge 3: First Name Judge 3: Last Name Judge 3: Title Judge Judge 3: E-mail'Address Judge 3: Phone Number Judge 3 Mailing Address: Street Judge 3 Mailing Address: Room/Floor Judge 3 Mailing Address: City Judge 3 Mailing Address: State Judge 3 Mailing Address: Zip Code Judge 4; First Name Judge 4: Last Name Judge 4: Title Judge Judge 4: E-mail Address Judge 4: Phone Number Judge 4 Mailing Address: Street Judge 4 Mailing Address: Room/Floor Judge 4 Mailing Address: City Judge 4 Mailing Address: State Judge 4 Mailing Address: Zip Code Judge 5: First Name Judge 5: Last Name Judge 5: Title Judge Ml Ext. Ext, http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.dedocumentPk-1404319271446 10/1/2014 •111.11.1.U. uf LI-111,011 .1,1.11•n I 0.0. Judge 5: Phone Number Judge 5 Mailing Address: Street Judge 5 Mailing Address: Room/Floor Judge 5 Mailing Address: City Judge 5 Mailing Address: State Judge 5 Mailing Address: Zip Code Judge 6: First Name Judge 6: Last Name Judge 6: Title Judge 6: E-mail Address Judge 6: Phone Number Judge 6 Mailing Address: Street Judge 6 Mailing Address: Room/Floor Judge 6 Mailing Address: City Judge 6 Mailing Address: State i.idge 6 Mailing Address: Zip Code Project Director (Main Program Contact): First Name* Project Director: Last Name* Project Director: Title" Project Director: Address* Project Director: Phone Number Project Director Mailing Address: Street* Project Director Mailing Address: Room/Floor Project Director Mailing Address: City* Project Director Mailing Address: State* Project Director Mailing Address: Zip Code* Financial Officer: First Name* Financial Officer: Last Name* Financial Officer: Title* Financial Officer: E-mail Address* Financial Officer: Phone Number* Suzanne Garrett Chief Probation Officer garretts@oakgov.corn 248-305-6071 48150 Grand River Ave Novi MI 48379 Melissa Walter Court Accounts Coordinator walterme@oakgov,com 248-305-6138 Judge Ext. Ext. Ext. Ext. http://micourts dullestech.net/getApp licationPrintPreview. do ?do cumentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 7-11Fant,ICII ,J1.114.51 111.1111U , Address: Street* Financial Officer Mailing Address: Room/Floor Financial Officer Mailing Address: City* Financial Officer Mailing Address: State* Financial Office Mailing Address: Zip Code* Authorizing Official: First Name* Authorizing Official: Last Name Authorizing Official: Title Authorizing Official: E-mail Address* Authorizing Official: Phone Number* Authorizing Official Mailing Address: Street* 48015 Grand River Ave Novi Ml 48374 Alexandra Black Court Administrator blacka@oakgov,com 248-305-6147 48150 Grand River Ave Ext. Authorizing Official Mailing Address: Room/Floor Authorizing Official Mailing Address: City* Authorizing Official Mailing Address: State* Authorizing Official Mailing Address: Zip Code* DCCM1S Contact Information Novi Ml 48374 DCCMIS Administrator {The person responsible for reporting data to SCAO): First Name* DCCMIS Administrator: Last Name* DCCMIS Administrator: E-mail Address* DCCMIS Administrator: Phone Number* Suzanne Garrett garretts@oakgov.com 248-305-6071 EXt, Program Description Caseload Data:* 1.) The court's caseload data that substantiates the target population and the need for the drug/DWI court program. Include any changes or trends in the data that further demonstrates the need for the drug/DWI court program. At the time of the 10 year study on our Sobriety Court Program results indicated that cases of known opiate users were not successful in our program. These individuals were handled through the Sobriety Court program instead of being given maximum incarceration as was dealt with in the past. This attempt failed as a large number were ultimately sentenced to maximum http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.dedocurnentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 ctusdi cm=iaiii u vamp!). ion 1., I LIc VI l/W 01 I I. I IM 111411711a61.1.0 .11 11Fly 411%4 kAi I new charges. After the study was completed a group of 22 inidviduals were placed in a special track of the Sobriety Court program and still following the 10 Key Components, were treated differently. These individuals started out their porgram in a minimum 30 day inpatient facility, and upon release were drug and alcohol tested daily. They were also required to perform community service full time until they were able to obtain full time employment or education. These very specific differences in how these cases were treated yielded a much better result for this population. While results are early, of the 22, 19 have graduated, 1 new arrest has occurred, and 2 participants absconded. Unfortunately, due to staffing issues we were unable to continue this successful program. Since the recent discontinuation of the program, Washtenaw County, an adjoining county to the 52-1 District Court jurisdiction recorded 8 overdose calls in a 2 day period between June 6-7, 2013, 2 of the individuals were pronounced dead. Last week an individual on probation at 52nd 1st Division District Court who would have been selected for the Opiate Court had it been active, overdosed and died. Since recieving the grant on 10/1113, 20 participants were admitted to the program. Of these 20, 13 are still in the program, six have been removed and one person absconded during residential treatment. The 52nd 1st Division District Court serves 12 jurisdictions with a population of over 200,000 people. Between 2009-2012 the average number of new drug related cases was 900 per year, approximately 15% per year is sentenced to maximum incarceration. Case Dispositions Time Frame:* 2.) The time frame (or case dispositions, include any delays. Average case disposition time for general cases is approximately 60 days, delays would include those set for Bench Trials, Jury Trials, Discovery, Bench Warrants and Forensic Reviews. Due to the fact our Sobriety Court Program has been established for 12 years, our police departments are familiar with the program and often contact the probation department to have a case placed on a "fast track" if they feel the individual Would be suitable for the program. If the case isn't identified at the time of arrest, they are often identified by the judicial staff at the time of pre-trial. That individual is then processed through faster, and at a minimum they are disposed /21 2pproy,jrn2tely 30 d2ys faster trim the avork:,1 ,.., The. P week delay ri having a pr.,-s.ntence jnvoGti9aficn conducted is eliminated and the sentencing date is at least a week sooner, Once the defendant becomes a participant they meet with their probation officer the same day the contract is signed. Incarceration/Detention:" 3.) The degree to which the court uses incarceration/detention for the target population, arm the case of child abuse and neglect, the degree to which faster care and adoption Is currently railed upon for the children of the participant. This population is frequently incarcerated. Because most of this population ends up accruing numerous offenses within a short time period, they are often incarcerated due to their criminal record. In the fiscal year 2012, a total of 13,646 jail days were given to 138 people, Some of these people were sentenced to straight jail time, and some were sentenced to jail subsequent to probation violations. Only 1 of those people were in the test group of Opiate Court, 3 of those people were known opiate addicts that were a part of Sobriety Court following that protocol. Since the start of opiate court, we've had 70 jail days as a sanction and 825 jail days after removal. Those who recieved sanctions may have served the maximum term of incarceration were if not for the opiate court program thus saving the jail expense of 2,533 days. Program Goals (Required) Goal 1:* Reduce drug use during program participation After a 10 year study of the Sobriety Court was conducted, it was discovered that opiate users were the least successful http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 p0.11a41t.IGLI IL. III LIU. tat ve PI I {, 111. 11,...,.111,n7114 1.4,, WI LI Me FYI LIVII,M1,•-• *Wu., , Additionally, the overall recidivism rate was 11,2% taking in all participants. Removing the opiate population brought that number down to 9.2%. As a result it was decided these participants needed to be dealt with differently. Due to the depth of the addiction and all of the lifestyle factors involved, it was realized that taking them out of the environment was paramount. All opiate users were therefore sent directly to a 30 day inpatient facility for treatment. The day the person is let out of the treatment facility they report directly to the probation department for a meeting with their probation officer. Through the assistance from recovering opiate addicts who had been on probation, substance abuse counselors and studying variables, the number one factor to assist in attaining short term sobriety from opiates after the 30 day inpatient stay was through daily drug testing. Each recovered opiate addict reported that daily drug testing assisted In preventing the "bad thinking" from creeping up to the point of seeking out use. A 90 day period of daily drug testing was implemented. Although drug testing isn't always necessary daily to catch use, it significantly increased the amount of people that made it past their 90 day mark of sobriety. The plan is to continue and expound on the "test' group protocol. The utilization of the initial inpatient stay and daily drug testing were paramount to yielding real life results of reducing drug use. A survey was completed by the current active cases within the opiate court program. Of the 10 respondents, nine indicated that AA/NA meetings were "very important" in maintaining their sobriety. Since the inception of the Opiate Court, there have only been three participants who used an opiate while in the program. Most importantly, there have not been any deaths within the program. Goal 2:* Retain participants in the drug court program Most opiate addicts have been unable to maintain gainful employment. Employment is obviously necessary for self-esteem and giving them purpose, but also takes up idle time. Many of the past participants could maintain the short term sobriety but would often express still having constant thoughts of using. The busier they were the more likely to not succumb to the thoughts. All of these participants following their inpatient stay were required to perform 20 hours of community service work or more until they were able to either gain full time employment or full time schooling, or a combination of both. With this condition in place most participants obtained employment within 2 weeks. Additionally, these participants were required to report to their probation officer twice weekly instead of once until they obtained full time employment. The constant contact and support from the probation officer combined with daily NA meetings were also reported by the participants to assist in keeping them focused, Of the 20 participants involved thus far in the Opiate Court Program, six have been unsuccessfully removed from the program. This provides the program with a 70% success rate, Goal 3:* Reduce drug and alcohol related crime In the jurisdiction (may not be applicable to amily Dependency Courts) A small control group of 22 people were subjected to the separate conditions as stated above, in addition to all of the conditions of sobriety court that were already in place. These people were therefore placed on 18 months probation, placed in an inpatient facility for a minimum of 30 days, testing daily for alcohol and drugs for 90 days following inpatient, report to the probation officer twice weekly, obtain full time employment or perform a minimum of 20 hours of community service per week, attend outpatient substance abuse counseling for 9 months, attend ANNA daily for 90 days followed by 3 times per week, obtain a sponsor within 1 month, attend judicial review once monthly and unannounced home visits. Therefore, the 10 key components will continue to be utilized with these special conditions. This combination of intensive supervision increased the success rate of this opiate target population by over 90%. The individuals that completed the program successfully each had no less than 6 months of sobriety. None of these that completed successfully have been re-arrested. Given that the Opiate Court Program has only been in operation for nine months, no one has completed the 18 month program yet. Of the 13 active participants, 11 are in the intensive phase while two are in aftercare. Goal 4:* Alleviate congestion of court dockets As we have three sobriety court/drug court officers that work specifically on these cases, their caseloads are greatly reduced due http://micourts.dullestechmet/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 W 1119 interisiv UpiVIalLirI. M pcu LI UI uywVIIIJi I, LI IV 'Vint-0M G I JL)IIIIJI LI GE21 ly !UZI ILI I It•CILll.fl I V1 Ul court/drug court clients. Through constant contact with the police departments, judges and judicial staff, defendants are identified as having a need as early as pre-trial. However, we are currently working with police departments in order to identify opiate abusers as early as their arrest. Assuring that pre-sentence investigations are done by one of these officers allows an early introduction of the program to the defendant. The availibility of this program allows pies agreements, and therefore case resolution to occur quickly. Goal 5:* Alleviate jail or detention overcrowding (if applicable) Prior to the Sobriety Court implementation in 2001, there was very little alternative to incarceration for repeat offenders who had not performed well while on probation in the past, Often times the 'recommendation for sentencing would be maximum jail instead of probation as the defendant had a history of non-compliance. Since the program was implemented, we have been able to offer this alternative to jail and have had success with individuals who had not completed probation in the past. Most of these offenders would have received 1 year in jail if the program was not in place as the program was geared toward Mill_ 2nd Offenders. As earlier data cited, last year alone 128 individuals received 13,646 jail days not including OUIL 2nd offenses, these were drug related only, offering an alternative to incarceration on even 30 of those individuals could be in excess of 10.000 jail days. Goal 6:* Retain participants in substance abuse treatment Through good relationships with a group of about eight treatment providers in the area we have been able to obtain reduced rates for treatment for participants. Due to the long term of attendance most counselors were willing to reduce their rates when the individual was uninsured or didn't qualify for state funding. These therapists were selected because of their continuous excellent services they were providing. They attend status review hearings and offer assistance and insight. Participants are ordered to attend no less than 36 weeks of 1-2 time weekly counseling. If a relapse occurs the defendant is immediately placed back into treatment. Program Goals (Optional) Goal 7: Reduce child abuse and neglect (If applicable) The opiate addicted population often: has open cases with Child Protective Services, This department works closely with CPS to insure compliance with parenting classes or additional therapy necessary to retain or obtain custody of their children. Home searches have been a very useful tool to assist CPS in checking on the welfare of the children and observe the parent/child interaction, Eliminating the drug use has reduced neglect in and of itself. Goal 8: List other goal specific to your drug/DWI court program here Goal 9: List other goal specific to your drug/DWI court program here Goal 10: List other goal specific to your drug/DWI court program hare http://micourts.du11estech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 1,,,MUNt pm: ,FM.M1 ,mmm,,um Target Population Check ail that apply What is the target population:* Other, please explain: Describe how the above information differs from previous years procedures:" Misdemeanor, Drug Offender, High Risk Participants should live within the jurisdiction of our court although transfer cases are considered and frequently accepted. Also, the drug of choice is an opiate with either abuse or addiction indications, Since our treatment court was a Sobriety Court in the past, the target population was OWI. However, there were many occassions when drug offenders were also allowed in the program. The purpose of the Drug Court program is to target any Opiate related cases. Screening and Eligibility Describe the eligibility criteria:* 1.) Individuals with violent offenses, excluding Domestic Violence will not be admitted to the program. 2.) Additionally, only persons who reside within the jurisdiction of the 52-1 District Court will be admitted. 3.)The participant must be an opiate abuser or addict 4.) The person shall not have a drug delivery charge. How are potential participants Pre-Bond Investigation, Law Enforcement, Probation Agent, Prosecuting Attorney, Participant, identified:* Treatment Provider, Pre-Trial, Judges, Defense Attorney, Family If Other, please describe: Legal Eligibility Screening:* Describe when the legal eligibility screening occurs, who conducts the screening, and who determines eligibility. The probation officer or program coordinator conducts the screening for eligibility. This process can occur at pre-trial, probation violation hearing, sentencing, or at any other point they are identified as a potential candidate. Once they are identified the screening occurs on the same day. A discussion regarding the eligibility of the potential participant is conducted with all team members. Is a risk/needs assessment used to help identify high risk/high need offenders? Risk Assessement?:* Yes If answered yes to the above question, name the assessment tool used Assessment Tool: NEEDS Describe how the above Information differs from There is no difference. previous years' procedures:* Assessments What Is the name of the substance abuse assessment tool that is used? Substance Abuse Assessment NEEDS Tool:* Does the assessment provide a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Osm) diagnosis? DSM Diagnosis:* Yes http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk---1404319271446 10/1/2014 • II clfl•NVVVICLI flU IV II(VVUV l4CWOLlVff VGJ411.1.nG thrc ouuuzai t.c YYYYY rose How substance use diagnosis is determined: Clinical Assessment:* Describe when the clinical assessment is conducted and who conducts the assessment. The NEEDS testing is administered at the time of plea by a probation clerical staff member. The assessment is placed in the file and reviewed by the probation officer at the time of the pre-sentence investigation. is the American Society of Addiction Medicine criteria used to determine appropriate level of treatment? American Society of Addiction Medicine Criteria:* How treatment level is determined: if answered no to the above question, describe how the level of treatment is determined Through the NEEDS assessment and the pre-sentence investigation. A risk assessment is also utililzed through Pre-trial Services for those defendants who are incarcerated. Describe how the above information differs from There is no difference. previous years procedures:* r‘l.t"4,77,..rg C=10- 0" .0 Substance Abuse Treatment Agencies:* List the substance abuse treatment agencies and the type of services available for drug/DWI court participants Community Programs Incorporated - inpatient, womens issues, mans issues, groups, medical, mental health, medications. Sequoia Recovery Services - 3/4 housing, assistance with employment, dual diagnosis, transitional housing. Solutions to Recovery - 3/4 housing, assistance with employment, transitional housing Gretchen Hart, private therapist - group and individual outpatient substance abuse counseling Jeffrie Cape, private therapist - group and individual outpatient substance abuse counseling James Schepper, private therapist - group and individual outpatient substance abuse counseling Abaris Counseling Services - Intensive outpatient and outpatient substance abuse counseling Oakland Family Services - Intensive outpatient and outpatient substance abuse counseling Milford Counseling - Intensive outpatient substance abuse counseling, outpatient substance abuse counseling, mental health counseling, groups and individual available. Check all that apply Treatment is provided:* Determined by the participant and/or insurance If treatment is provided through a contract(s), was there a competitive bid process? Competitive Bid Process:* No Are participants linked to treatment providers based on individual differences? No http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 I ME111.111G1111. ruuIU Treatment Process:* Process:* Explain the answer given to the above question, describing the process Initially the defendant will be placed in a 30 day inpatient minimum program. Following the inpatient, the defendant is referred to outpatient counseling a minimum of once weekly, The treatment process changes if the needs of the participant changes. If a relapse occurs, or the therapist or client feels there is an increased need for treatment, the participant will be ordered to attend more. During the monthly review sessions if there are issues of concern for the team, the therapist is contacted and a discussion about increasing treatment is pursued. Normally if the team agrees that the defendant is in need of additional groups or services or a change in therapeutic approach, the recommendation is followed. Treatment Plan:* Who develops the effnica/ treatment plan? How often is the treatment plan reviewed and by whom? The treatment plan is developed between the therapist and the client. Since there is a signed release of information allowing full disclosure the probation officer and team often has input into the treatment plan as well. What ancillary services are available to the participants in the program? Check all that apply' Ancillary Services:" Educational, Housing, Mental Health, Dental, Food, Career, Transportation, Clothing, Parenting Classes If Other, please describe: Describe how the above information differs from There is no difference. previous years procedures:* Program Length 18 the drug/DWI court program?* Describe the factors used to determine the program length Program Length Factors:* The program was designed to last 18 months,as long as the defendant remains in compliance. However, it can last up to 24 months if more time is needed to achieve the goals of the program. If an individual violates the rules of drug court too close to the end of the program the length may be extended up to an additional 6 months, How many phases does the program consist of?* Describe what factors were used to determine the length of each phase:* What Is the minimum length of the drug/DWI court program?* http://micourts.thillestech.netigetApplicationPrintPreview.do ?documentPk-1404319271446 10/1/2014 What is the maximum length of 24 6 uerenoanis wiii enter uruy I. Ur I ;a ueulyuu bur roumntylz LJI JLHI5VJI 1GOc u Drug Court is nine months in duration, the participant is allowed up to 12 months to complete the requirements of the first phase of Drug Court. If the defendant successfully completes the Intensive phase of Drug Court which typically occurs at the nine month point, the participant is sentenced following the informal commencement ceremony at the review hearing. The participant is, at that time, sentenced to an 18 month term of probation and is given credit for the first nine months as a participant in Drug Court. The participant then moves to the Aftercare Phase of the program. Failure to graduate from the Intensive Phase within 12 months results in revocation of Drug Court status and immediate sentencing. With non-compliance in either the Intensive Phase or Aftercare Phase and a team decision to terminate the participant from the program, the defendant is sentenced to a term of incarceration. Within the 2 major phases, intensive and aftercare, there are mini phases. The defendant completes the first phase once they successfully complete their 30 day inpatient stay. if they remain compliant they are eligible to "step down" at the 18 week mark which means they can reduce the amount of probation appointments to every other week and may have a curfew extension to 11:00pm, This "step down" only occurs with complete compliance in the first 18 weeks. In the aftercare phase the participant may have their probation appointments reduced to once monthly at the year mark, if they have remained in full compliance for a minimum of 90 days, If the participant completes all special requirements in the first 18 months and is determined eligible, they remain on non-reporting probation until the next formal graduation occurs. in some cases weeks and in some cases up to 6 months. These phases were determined by best practices, partipartt feedback and reviewing other court's procedures. If phases are not used, explain how a participant progresses through the program List the requirements for completing each phase:* e.g. the number, type, and frequency of drug tests, attendance at support groups, etc. Phase 1 -The participant must successfully complete a minimum of 30 days inpatient. Phase 2 - participant must be in the program no less than 4 1/2 months. Following inpatient treatment the participant will test for drugs and alcohol each morning before 7:30am. The participant also must have a minimum of 130 days of sobriety, have remained in full compliance, which would mean a completion of at least 18 counseling sessions, a minimum of 105 AA/NA meetings, have a sponsor and report for a minimum of 110 alcohol and drug tests. The participant will be required to work full time/education full time or do community service full time. Report to the probation officer at least 18 times, and have 3 successful home searches. Maintain a curfew of 1Opm-5:30am (with the exception of individuals working shift work). Phase 3 - commencement phase - the defendant must remain in compliance, receiving no major violations within 90 days of moving to the commencement phase. The defendant must have a minimum of 90 days clean time. Additionally, the defendant must have completed at least 36 outpatient counseling sessions. Phase 4- aftercare phase - the defendant must remain in this phase for a minimum of 6 months. During this phase Judicial Reviews are only conducted if there are sanctions to be imposed. The participant will continue to attend NA/AA 3 times per week, report to probation every 2 weeks, test for alcohol and drugs a minimum of 3 times per week, continue to maintain full time employment, and have at least 2 successful home searches. Maintain a curfew of 12am - 5:30pm, Phase 5 - This is the transition phase. This phase lasts for at least 3 months. The defendant will continue to attend monthly probation meetings monthly, testing for alcohol and drugs 3 times per week, maintain full time employment, and attend at least 3 NA/AA meetings per week. Phase 6- commencement phase - The defendant will remain in this phase until the next formal graduation. This phase can vary from 1 month to 6 months depending on the date of the commencement. The defendant is required to abide by all criminal laws, and refrain from the use of alcohol and drugs. How is the phase in which a participant starts the program determined?" Describe how the above information differs from previous years procedures:" Everyone starts in the first phase. There is no difference. http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Case Management Case Management is provided by:* If other, please explain: What is the ratio of participants to the case manager (e.g. 50:1)? Case Manager Ratio:* 30:1 Case Manager Responsibilities:* How are the responsibilities and activities of the case manager(s) integrated with the activities of the treatment provider(s) and ancillary services provider(s)? Communication between the case manager (probation officer) and the treatment provider have at least weekly contact. Progress reports are received weekly, however there is open communication between the two and contact is made immediately upon any divergent behavior such as a missed appointment or missed test. In addition, significant behavioral issues are discussed between the two within the day. Prior to entering the aftercare phase, a new treatment plan is developed indicating decreasing counseling gradually. It is at this time that weekly contact becomes bi-weekly to monthly. How frequently does the case manager have contact with the participant? Check all that apply. Contact Frequency:* If other, please describe: Contacts are: Contact Type:* If other, please describe: Describe how the above information differs from previous years' procedures:* Daily, Biweekly, Bimonthly, Weekly, Monthly, Every three weeks The contact with the defendant is based on their needs, and their risk level. Probation officers have met with participants from a daily to monthly basis. Face to Face, In Writing/E-mail, By Telephone There is no difference. Judicial Supervision Status Review Hearings* How frequently does the participant appear before the judge for status review hearings? The participants attend judicial reviews twice monthly at a minimum. If the participant has a special need, or sanction, they may be reviewed more often. Description of Review Hearings* Please describe the status review hearings, Including how they operate and how each participant interacts with the court. During review hearings, probation officers will call the participants name and they are given applause. The probation will explain the participants number of days sober, days in the program and points that they have accrued. Any other relevant information is explained and then the participant is given a chance to address the court. If there is a sanction, the judge will discuss the behavior which brought about the sanction, explain the sanction and future expectations and encourage the participant to improve. The participant is given an opportunity to explain him or herself and then the sanction is given. When a participant is doing well, the partipant receives applause and the judge indicates his approval with the participant and there Is another round of applause while the judge shakes their hand and offers them their incentive them their incentive. Also, during this process, family members are given the opportunity to address the court. Status Review Hearing Probation Officers http://micourts.dullestecknet/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?docurnentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 UCII1.114.11401KV. ',471.0G riky vv,cmu, k I lle112111 GlAVI I I .1-1.111,, 1-/C,-11.G Attorney, Treatment Providers, Clinical Staff If Other, please describe: 42 CFR Part 2 and HIPAA:* What is the program's policy and/or procedure (a) for complying with 42 CFR Part 2 and WPM during the status review hearing? Participants sign a full disclosure release of information. The following is a cut and pasted version of the exact document we utilize: hereby consent to communication between any substance abuse treatment facility and/or counselor/therapist and any member of our drug court treatment team. The purpose of and need for this disclosure is to inform the court and other above- named parties of my eligibility and/or acceptability for substance abuse treatment services and my treatment attendance, prognosis, compliance and progress in accordance with the Drug Court monitoring criteria.Disclosure of this confidential information may be made only as necessary for and pertinent to hearings and/or reports concerning .1 understand that this consent becomes effective from the date I enter Drug Court and will remain in effect until such time as I have successfully completed this program in its entirety or have been revoked and sentenced for failure to comply with all terms and requirements of the Drug Court program, I understand that any disclosure made is bound by Part 2 of Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which governs, the confidentiality of substance abuse client records, and that recipients of this information may re-disclose it only in connection with their official duties. In order to insure compliance, we have established a Confidentiality Compliance Officer. Their role is to be sure each team member is aware of regulations and to verify that all participants sign the above release. When do staffing meetings occur?* Immediately prior to the status review hearing Description of Staffing Meeting * Please describe the team meetings, including how they operate and how decisions regarding participants are made. Staffing meetings occur in chambers prior to the review hearings. All members of the team are present. The participants being reviewed are placed in order of most compliant to least compliant. The probation presents a written and oral presentation to the members indicating the number of days sober, number of days in the program, what phase they are in and number of points accrued. Further information such as counseling and AA attendance is included along with the suggested course of action whether It be a sanction or an incentive. All team members discuss the defendant and how they are progressing in their recovery and all need to be in agreement with the sanction or incentive. Decisions regarding sanctions in particular need to be approved by all and the appropriate sanction is given based upon best practices and standards set forth within the opiate court program. Check all that apply. Who attends the staffing Defense Attorney, Treatment Providers, Community Advocate, Coordinator, Program Director, meetings?* Peer Support/Mentor If Other, please describe: No Staffing Meeting: If no staffing meeting occurs prior to the status review hearing, explain the reason why. Explain the process for updating the team on each participant's status. Describe how the above information differs from There is no difference. previous years' procedures:* Drug Testing Drug Test Frequency?* How frequently are participants required to submit to alcohol and/or drug testing? http://micourts.dullesteclimet/getApplicationPrintPreview . do ?do cumentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 cca vesyuriuill iw pivytaiii lb IWLIUHVU Lu LCbt. uciiiy 11)1 Uls.lb UI 1.11CIIlL vla uay. Hove LIIIII Lt uniu vvao raciocu the reports of the addicts themselves who all indicated in the initial stages of recovery from Opiates the daily drug testing is what kept them "focused" on not using. The frequency of testing is reduced based on full compliance with negative tests and no missed tests. The participants testing is reduced by 2 times per month based on compliance, and never gets reduced to less than 3 times per week (12 times per month). What type of drugs does the drug/DWI court program test for? Check all that apply. Drugs Tested?* If Other, please describe Marijuana, Cocaine, Benzodiazepine, Oxycodone, MDMA, Barbiturates, Bath Salts, Opioids, Amphetamine, Methamphetamine, Methadone, PCP, Synthetic Marijuana, Other Suboxone and Tricyclic Antidepressants, ETG, adulteration Does your program utilize a testing agency for drug and alcohol testing? Drug Testing Agency:* If yes, list which agency(s) are being utilized Yes JAMS, Second Chances, Onsite, DNA. All of these facilities have been checked to insure they follow proper observation procedures, Does your drug/OW1 court program perform alcohol and drug testing? Perform Alcohol and Drug Testing? If yes, list who performs the The probation officers conduct observed drug testing utillizing the I-Cup from Redwood testing: Toxicology and send the samples to the lab if necessary, Who is notified of the test results? How soon is notification made concerning positive test results? Test Result Notification:* The probation officer is notified on the same day as the positive test. The team is notified immediately after the probation officer is made aware so preparations for an emergency review can be made. What is the response to a positive alcohol or drug test result? Positive Result Response? Describe how the above information differs from previous years procedures:* The participant is immediately contacted and advised to come to the court. They are given only a few hours to appear. The participant is incarcerated immediately and an emergency review hearing is held on the same day. Since the participant is only allowed to test in the morning before 7:30am, notification of a positive test usually occurs by 9:00am. Therefore, the entire day is available to handle the case. Sanctions can include curfew restrictions, increased testing, incarceration, revocation of driver's license priveleges, increase in treatment and/or electronic monitoring. There is no difference. Incentives List Incentives your program uses List the reason an Incentive is used Who can award an Incentive and when does this happen free drug testing 34 days of full compliance Judge at the judicial review hearing gift cards phase advancement Judge at judicial review hearing movie passes 30 days of complete compliance Judge at the judicial review hearing reduction In probation appointments at completion of 2nd phase, 3rd phase and 5th phase Judge at the judicial review hearing relaxation of curfew at the completion of 2nd phase, 3rd phase and 5th phase Judge at judicial review at completion of 2nd and 3rd phase, probation officer at completion of 5th phase. accolades from Judge (applause, praise) any positive changes the defendant makes Judge at judicial review hearing sporting event tickets At completion of 3rd phase Judge at the judicial review hearing Signed sports memorabilia . Completion of the 3rd phase and completion of program Judge at judicial review hearing or graduation phase advancement completion of all requirements for advancement Judge at judicial review hearing permission for up to 3 night vacation (only granted twice in program) If participant remains in complete compliance for first 90 days arid second vacation granted if complete compliance for 1 year, The judge at judicial review, probation officer for second vacation If defendant in complete 1 year compliance. Sanctions http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApp1icationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Yes — List Sanctions your program uses List the reason a Sanction is used Who can administer a Sanction and when does this happen curfew restrictions curfew violation, positive test, missed test, late test Judge at judicial review hearing Increase testing missed test, late test, positive test Judge at judicial review hearing Increase in AA meetings missed AA meetings and missed counseling Judge at judicial review hearing Community service late test, missed probation appointment, missed judicial review Judge at judicial review hearing incarceration missed test, late test, dishonesty, forging, positive test, missed judicial review (occassionally) Judge at judicial review hearing revocation of driver's license priveleges On interlock pilot program) positive alcohol test Judge at judicial review hearing detention in court holding celi late test, missed judicial review hearing Judge at judicial review day in court observing proceedings late test, missed probation appointment, missed judicial review Judge at judicial review hearing increase in treatment missed counseling, missed AA, positive test Judge at judicial review hearing. electronic monitoring (gps, SCRAM, in-horns alcaho monitor) positive test, missed test, curfew violation Judge at judicial review Graduation Requirements Graduation Requirements:* Discuss the program's requirements for graduation. The defendant must complete the following: 1, have at least 90 days of sobriety/clean time. 2. nust hav,3vii ivit 9 judicial status revivi hiriis 3. must have completed 30 days minimum of inpatient treatment. 4. must have completed a minimum of 36 outpatient counseling sessions. 5. must have been in the program for at least 18 months. 6. must have fines and costs paid in full. 7. must have relapse prevention or ongoing self-help support 8. must have completed all phases Once graduation occurs:* the participant is no longer under the court's jurisdiction Describe how the above information differs from there is no difference previous years procedures:" Expulsion Criteria Termination Criteria:* Explain the criteria for terminating a participant from the program. The conditions for termination are as follows: 1. Forging of documentation hup://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?clocumentn=1404319271446 10/1/2014 L, .5 minimum major violations ksanuuoilb mak 3. Accruing a new charge (excluding DWLS) 4. Automatic termination upon accruing a new felony. 5. Dishonesty Explusion is discussed with team members immediately. Explusion recommendation is made to the judge who makes the final decision. Describe how the above information differs from there is no difference, previous years procedures:* Sustainability Plan Sustainability Plan:* Explain the plan for addressing program needs (i.e., treatment resources, team members, clinical and legal criteria, target population, program design, and funding) that are required to sustain the program when/if grant funds are no longer available. The Sobriety Court program that was established here in 2001 was initially a grant funded program. Since its inception the program has evolved into what it is today through constant re-evaluation with the assistance of all team members. This program became self sufficient after proving its continued excellence with assistance from team members and through county funding. The plan for Opiate Court is the same. The program will provide an option to jail for the judges and defense attorneys. The expectation is that with the availibility of this program it will run at capacity on a constant basis, much like Sobriety Court has since inception. The team members will continue to support Drug Court Month as it has for the Sobriety Court and Veterans Court to assist in the increased awareness throughout the state, All team members from treatment courts will continue to attend and assist in the MADCP conference planning. Promoting the awareness on the local level through the Advisory Board will also be continued. In 2013, three sobriety court officers began attending Families Against Narcotics (FAN). Two of the officers are on the advisory board and are instrumental in increasing growth and public awareness. The mission of FAN is: "To raise awareness of the prescription opiate drug abuse epidemic, to reduce the stigma and change the face of addiction, to educate about the dangers of prescription drug abuse and its potential to lead some to illegal narcotic use and to support those affected by drug abuse or addiction," Continuous meetings with team members, aside from judicial reviews, including the defense advocate, prosecutor, judges, probation officers, treatment providers and Advisory Committee will assist in sustaining positive relationships amongst the team. These meetings will provide insight into possible necessary changes, and present new ideas, Partnerships with Oakland University, Eastern Michigan University, and Ferris State University will continue to assist with research and internships. Keeping these relationships with large Universities has provided the department with much needed support and outreach. Involvement with the MADCP, NOCI, and SCAO will continue to provide networking, and assistance when needed. The Adisory Committee has continued to run the 501c3 and provides funds for the treatment courts at 52-1 District Court and is ready and willing to support the Opiate Court. We are exploring the possibility of a Drug Court Participant Fee, Describe how the above Information differs from Exploring the possibility of a Drug Court Participant fee, previous years' procedures:* Evaluation Plan http://micourts. dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?do cumentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 7.7 WV-111 yuuiIJSVW UV conducting a process Yes evaluation?* Will your program be conducting an outcome Yes evaluation?* Describe the evaluation: The Drug Court Case Management information System is a very useful evaluation tool. However, the evaluation is only as comprehensive as the data being inputted. The plan is to continue to comply with the entry of data but additionally, utilize the new clerical staff to insure all areas are up to date so that quarterly reports are with real time accuracy. Since the program is an offspring of the Sobriety Court program and these participants will be on a separate track, close attention to this population is necessary to insure the program is working for them early on. Using the DCCMIS we will extrapalate sanctions to find commonalities and make programming changes as needed for continued success of the participant. The partnerships with Universities will also assist in this area as interns will assist in the continuous research into the success of the participants, Success is defined through reduced recidivism and increased sobriety. Additionally, as participants continue to show success, personal interviews with the participant will be conducted to investigate what portion of the program they feel is working for them, and again commonalities will be expounded upon. Exit interviews are held in an attempt to identify the best and least successful components of the program in an unending attempt to reduce recidivism, increase sobriety and decrease jail costs, How does your program define recidivism?* if Other, please describe: What type of charge(s) and/or conviction(s) qualifies as recidivism?* If Other, please describe: New Conviction Any misdemeanor, Any felony Drug Court Team Who are the members of the drug/DWI court team?* If Other, please describe: Judge, Coordinator, Defense Attorney, Case Manager, Parole/Probation Agent, Treatment Provider, Prosecutor, Other Advisory Committee Members and Community Support Check the mechanisms for communication that are used by the drug/DWI court team members, (Check all that apply). Court Team Communication:* Journal entry using DCCMIS, Phone, Fax, Staffing meeting, E-mail, Texts, In-person If Other, please describe: Describe how the above information differs from There is no difference, previous years procedures:* Program Income Will your court program earn program income as defined Yes above?* Program Income Sources: If yes, what are the program income sources and how much is charged for each program income source (e.g., drug tests $5; participation fees $250, etc.)? We will be exploring the possibility of a Drug Court fee. Participants will be paying for their drug tests but the court does not profit from those tests. We will be collecting $40 per month Probation Oversight Expenses, and Fines and Costs as allowable per the statute on each case. http://micourts. dulleste chmet/getApplic ati o nPrintPreview. do ?do curnentP k=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Certification Form Authorizing Official By checking the box, I certify that the below referenced person is the Authorizing Official for the court program.* Authorizing Official Name:* Date:* Project Director By checking the box, I certify that the below referenced person is the Project Director for the court program:* Project Director Name:* Date:* Financial Officer By checking the box, I certify that the below referenced person is the Financial Officer for the court program:* Financial Officer Name:* Date:" By checking this box, I certify that the Chief Judge of this court supports our court applying for this grant opportunity.* Yes Alexandra Black 07/02/2014 Yes Suzanne Garrett 07/02/2014 Yes Melissa Walter 07/02/2014 Yes Personnel Name Position Computation Request Other Grant Or Funding Sources Local Cash Contribution Local In-Kind Contribution Total Suzanne Garrett Chief Probation Officer $30.62 x 288 = $6,819 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,819.00 $8,819.00 Eric Noll Probation Officer I $21,10 x 2080= $43,896.00 $37.495.00 $0.00 $0,00 $6,401.00 $43,896,00 Angela Soot District Court Clerk Ill $18,70 x 1040-.... $19,448 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,448.00 $19,445.00 $37,495.00 $0.00 $0.00 $34,668,00 $72,163.00 Personnel Justification Personnel Justification* Justify personnel (I.e., wages) associated with the proposed project. These personnel costs should tie back to the Budget Request Summary and Budget Detail worksheet. The Opiate Court clients require very intense supervision. In the initial phase of the program, the participant will be seen twice weekly in the office and at least once monthly at their home during an unannounced search. The caseload should not exceed http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Row Employer FICA Percentage Request Other Grant Or Funding Sources $0.00 Local Cash Contribution $0.00 I Total 849000 $,'""n1 / Local In-Kind Contribution 7.65% 52,868.00 .DJ peuIIUIUIILC ULM 11) LIlO 116LU1 0 1.-11 Uf.l0I V111-111, 1.1.41 ei my 611 L/1 1.110 1 14111....01. 1410.41110j II, 000.....-1.1% Court Officers have reached maximum capacity on their caseloads. The additional probation officer would continue to be solely responsible for the cases in Opiate Court. Due to the nature of this caseload, it is preferred a seasoned Sobriety Court Officer be in charge of this caseload. Therefore, the funds would be utilized to retain a probation officer that would be in charge of the Sobriety Court caseload, and a seasoned Sobriety Court Officer would be transferred to the Opiate Court caseload. This would be allowable due to the fact that our existing LAO covers the new proposed program. Eric Noll is currently a full-time probation officer at the 52-1 District Court and would be continued in the position. In order to continue with compliance in entering data into the DCCMIS and to assist with this caseload, a part time clerical person is required. The department currently has 3 full time and 1 part time clerical person to service the probation department which is comprised of 9 full time and 4 part time probation officers, as well as 2 part time community service officers. This clerical staff is also required to assist other departments on a daily basis. The part time clerical person would be responsible for insuring the files are up to date and prepared for the Opiate Court Officer, providing any clerical support necessary, as well as the input of DCCMIS data. Lastly, the home searches have become very difficult to complete as all overtime was taken from the budget of the 52-1 District Court. Overtime pay would enable the officer to work after hours to complete this very necessary task. The overtime request amount is based on the salary of a 10 year veteran salary or higher. Since there is no budget at 52-1 District Court for overtime, there are no funds to pay for the veteran officer that would be selected for Opiate Court to conduct searches as the program dictates. Fringe Benefits 1,HU.LJU E l-2 'f Hospital Insurance 0% $12,098.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,065.00 $14,163.00 Dental Insurance 0% $690.00 $0.00 $0 00 $118.00 $808.00 VisTon Insurance 0% $100.00 $0,00 $0.00 $17.00 $117.00 Unemployment 0.32% $120.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21.00 $141.00 Worker's Compensation 1.38% $513.00 $0.00 $0,00 $98.00 8601.00 Life Insurance 0.49% $184.00 $0.00 $0.00 $31.00 $215.00 Other 1.37% $510.00 $0.00 $0.00 $87,00 $597.00 Other 0% $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Other 0% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Other 0% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Totals $27,503.00 $0.00 $0,00 $4,696.00 $32,199.00 Fringe Benefits Justification Fringe Benefits Justification' Justify fringe benefit costs associated with the proposed project. These fringe benefits should tie back to the Budget Request Summary and Budget Detail worksheet. The full time probation officer position will need fringe benefits as he will be working over 32 hours per week. Contractual Contractor Computation Services to be Provided Request Other Grant or Funding Local Cash Contribution Local In- Kind Contribution Total Subrecipient ContractorNendor http://micourts.dullestecEnet/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 P74111 1.0,0 141 JAMS 30 drug tests x $6 X 30 participants = $5400 Drug testing $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 Yes $0.00 $0.00 No Community Programs Incorporated 30 participants x $48.50 day x 30 days = $43650 inpatient''''' treatment $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $43,650.00 $43,650.00 $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $43,650.00 $43,650.00 Contractual Justification Contractual Justification* Justify contractual costs associated with the proposed project. These contractual costs should tie back to the Budget Request Summary and the Budget Detail Worksheet. Since these participants are required to test on a daily basis for alcohol and drugs 90 days in a row and are often unemployed it is anticipated that these testing costs may be difficult to pay. The testing agency JAMS currently provides a discounted rate for treatment court participants of $6 per test. The individuals who are truly indigent may present documentation to their P.O. to support their financial need and funds will be made available for them to test. The participant will be responsible for a third of the drug testing, the 50103 will assist with a third of the testing, and grant funds will provide the last third. After the 90 days of testing in a row is completed the participant will be responsible for the remainder of their testing in the program. Each participant will start their program in CPI for 30 days. This is funded through Oakland County, 52-1 District Court funding source. Supplies Item Computation Request Other Grantor Funding Source Local Cash Contributions Local In-Kind Contributions Total graduation food This money was moved to salaryltringe benefits. $0.00 — $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 incentives 30 participants x 5 phase advancement x $10 gift cards $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 $0,00 graduation gift this money was moved to salary/fringe benefits $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 Supplies Justification Supplies Justification* Justify supply costs associated with the proposed project. These supply expenses should tie back to the Budget Request Summary and Budget Detail worksheet, The Opiate Court will conduct one graduation per year. The approximate cost for this graduation will be $800 for food and gifts for participants. As an incentive gift cards for food, gas, testing, and movies will be given. These cards will vary from $10420 in value. Donations through the 501c3 will pay for a portion of these costs. The request for these monies have been removed in an attempt to better cover the salary and fringe benefits. http://micourts.dullestechmet/getApplicationPrintPreview_do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Travel Type of Travel Expenses Computation Request Other Grantor Funding Source Local Cash Contributions Local In-Kind Contributions Total MADCP conference registration 1 registration x $275 Money moved to salary/fringe benefits $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 Travel Justification Travel Justification" Justify travel costs associated with the proposed project. The costs should tie back to the Budget Request Summary and the Budget Detail worksheet. The probation officer will need to attend the MADCP conference in 2015, additionally, the probation officer would benefit from the NADCP conference in 2015. All travel and training funds for probation officers has been removed from the current 52-1 District Court budget. The request for these monies have been removed in an attempt to better cover the salary and fringe benefits. Other Sources of Funding Other Sources of Funding* Currently, there is a full time probation clerical staff that will spend time on on this program. The 52- 1 District Court budget will continue to support the her salary and fringe benefits, The Coordinator is currently the full time Chief of Probation at 52-1 District Court and her salary and benefits will continue to be paid for through the 52-1 District Court budget, A 501c3 was established several years ago to assist with sustainability in our Sobriety Court Program. This Advisory Committee has expressed their intent to assist the new Opiate Court, Personnel Summary -. Budget Category Request Other Grant Or Funding Source Local Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Cost Personnel Total _$37,495.00 $0.00 $0.00 $34,668.00 $72,163.00 Fringe Benefits Summary Budget Category Request ' Other Grant Or Funding Source Local Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Cost Fringe Benefits Total $27,503,00_ $0.00 $0.00 $4,696.00 $32,199.00 http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationF'rintPreview.do?documentPk=1404319271446 10/1/2014 Contractual Summary Budget Category Request Other Grant Or Funding Source Local Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Cost Contractual Tota1 $0,00 $0,00 $0.00 $43,650.00 $4365000 Supplies Summary Budget Category Request Other Grant Or Funding Source Local Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Cost Supcfres Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 1 $0,00 Travel Summary Budget Category Request Other Grant Or Funding Source Local Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Cost Travel Total $0,00 $0.00 _ $0,00 $0,00 $0,00 Total Budget Budget Category Request Other Grant Or Funding Source Local Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Cost Total $64,998.00 $0.00 $0,00 $83,014.00 $148,012.00 http://micourts.dullestech.net/getApplicationPrintPreview.do?documentPk---1404319271446 10/1/2014 FISCAL NOTE (MISC . #14267) November 19, 2014 BY: FINANCE COMMITit, TOM MIDDLETON, CHAIRPERSON IN RE: 52/1 DISTRICT COURT (NOVI) — FY 2015 DRUG COURT GRANT - ACCEPTANCE To the Oakland County Board of Commissioners Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: Pursuant to Rule XII-C of this Board, the Finance Committee has reviewed the above referenced resolution and finds: 1. The 52nd District Court, Division I (Novi) has received a grant from the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO), Michigan Drug Court Program in the amount of $64,998 for the period of October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015. 2. The total program budget is for $148,012 which includes an award from SCAO of $64,998, General Fund support of $83,014 which consists of $43,650 operating support, $28,269 personnel support and $11,095 transfer from a General Fund expense account (731185) to cover the balance of the position cost. 3. The grant will provide partial funding for one (1) special revenue, full-time eligible Probation Officer I position (#3020205-11415). 4. A FY 2015 budget amendment is recommended as follows: General Fund #10100 District Court 52-1 Novi Expenditures 3020101-113290-731185 Medical Exam 3020101-121050-788001-27151Trans Out to 52/1 Drug Court Fund Total Expenditure FY 2015 FY 2015 FY 2015 Adopted Amendment Amended $ 0 ($11,095) ($11,095) 0 11,095 11 095 0 $ 0 $ 0 Special Revenue Fund 27151 Grant #GR0000000661 Activity GLB, Analysis Type GLB, Bud Ref 2015 Revenue 3020205-121050-695500-10100Trans In from GF- District Court 52/1 $ 0 3020205-121050-615571 Grants — State 75,000 Total Revenue $75,000 $11,095 $11,095 (10,002) 64,998 $ 1,093 $76,093 Expenditures 3020205-121050-702010 3020205-121050-722750 3020205-121050-722760 3020205-121050-722770 3020205-121050-722780 3020205-121050-722790 3020205-121050-722800 3020205-121050-722810 3020205-121050-722820 3020205-121050-722850 3020205-121050-731818 3020205-121050-732018 Salaries Workers Compensation Group Life Retirement Hospitalization Social Security Dental Disability Unemployment Optical Special Event Program Travel and Conference Total Expenditure $40,319 544 121 14,592 13,362 3,377 762 552 129 110 857 275 $75,000 $ 3,577 $43,896 55 599 94 215 (2,393) 12,199 801 14,163 (19) 3,368 46 808 45 597 12 141 7 117 (857) 0 (275) 0 $ 1,093 $76,093 FINANCE COMMITTEE VOTE: Motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote with Woodward, Scott and Crawford absent. Resolution #14267 November 19, 2014 Moved by Spisz supported by Quarles the resolutions (with fiscal notes attached) on the amended Consent Agenda be adopted (with accompanying reports being accepted). AYES: Gershenson, Gingell, Gosselin, Hatchett, Jackson, Long, Matis, McGillivray, Middleton, Quarles, Runestad, Scott, Spisz, Taub, Weipert, Woodward, Zack, Bosnic, Dwyer. (19) NAYS: None. (0) A sufficient majority having voted in favor, the resolutions (with fiscal notes attached) on the amended Consent Agenda were adopted (with accompanying reports being accepted). MEREBY APPROV HIS RESOLUTION DEPUTY COUNTY EXECUTIVE \C.;TING PURSUANT TO MCL 45.559A (7) (STATE OF MICHIGAN) (COUNTY OF OAKLAND) I, Lisa Brown, Clerk of the County of Oakland, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and accurate copy of a resolution adopted by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners on November 19th, 2014, with the original record thereof now remaining in my office. In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the County of Oakland at Pontiac, Michigan this 19th day of November 2014. Lisa Brown, Oakland County