1

Alameda County Probation Department

A Look into Probation Monthly Report

July 2013

Chief LaDonna M. Harris Chief Probation Officer

400 Broadway Oakland, California 94607

510-268-7233

2

Executive Summary This statistical report provides a brief summary of trends for adults and juveniles who have received services from the Alameda County Probation Department (ACPD) in July 2013. The purpose of this report is to promote greater understanding of the breadth and depth of services provided by the department and a snapshot of the populations we serve. This report is produced bi-monthly. The next report will be for September 2013.

This report was developed by the Alameda County Probation Department’s Data Analysis Research & Reporting Team (DARRT). We welcome your feedback. For questions or comments, please feel free to contact Colin Bell or Carissa Pappas, Management Analysts at: ProbationDataRequest@acgov.org

Table of Contents Adult Services Figure Page Number Adult Probation Counts 1 3

Adult Offense Types 2 3

Gender and Race of Adult Clients 3 4

Adults on Probation by Location 4 4

Primary Service Needs 5 5

Re-Aligned Population PRCS Cases Received 6 6

PRCS Gender and Race/Ethnicity Composition 7 6

PRCS Violation Types 8 7

Offense Types on Violations Filed for New Arrests of PRCS Clients 9 7

Juvenile Field Services Juvenile Probation Counts 10 8

Offense Types for Youth on Probation 11 8

Juveniles on Probation by Location 12 9

Juvenile Services-Referrals Referral Offense Types 13 10

Source for Referrals 14 10

Juvenile Referral Decisions by Month 15 11

Gender and Race of Youth Referred to Probation Department 16 11

Juvenile Referrals by Gender and Race/Ethnicity 17 12

Juvenile Facilities and Detention Alternatives Juvenile Hall/Secure Detention Counts 18 13

Juvenile Hall Admit Trends CY 2011, 2012and 2013 19 13

Juvenile Hall Release Trends CY 2011, 2012, and 2013 20 14

Juvenile Hall Detaining Offense Breakdown 21 14

Juvenile Hall Detaining Offenses by Race and Sex 22 15

GPS Monitoring 23 16

GPS Admit Trends CY 2011, 2012, and 2013 24 16

GPS Release Trends CY 2011, 2012, and 2013 25 17

Home Supervision Counts 26 18

Home Supervision Admit Trends CY 2011, 2012, and 2013 27 18

Home Supervision Release Trends CY 2011, 2012, and 2013 28 19

Camp Sweeney Counts 29 20

Offense Types for Youth Ordered to Camp Sweeney 30 20

Appendix Concentration of Juveniles on Probation per City/Zip Code by Age 31 21

Concentration of Juveniles on Probation per City/Zip Code by Race 32 22-23

3

Adult Services- Probation July 2013

Figure 1

Demographics Start of July Cases Opened

in July Cases Closed in

July End of July

Avg. Years on Probation

# % # % # % # % #

Female 2,138 16% 32 12% 11 24% 2,159 16% 4 Years

Male 11,091 84% 236 88% 34 76% 11,293 84% 5 Years

Total 13,270 100% 268 100% 45 100% 13,452 100% 5 Years

Black 6,630 50% 118 44% 18 40% 6,730 50% 4 Years

Latino 2,766 21% 72 27% 10 22% 2,828 21% 5 Years

White 2,711 20% 55 21% 13 29% 2,753 20% 5 Years

Asian 575 4% 12 4% 2 4% 585 4% 5 Years

Other 547 4% 11 4% 2 4% 556 4% ----

Total 13,229 100% 268 100% 45 100% 13,452 100% 5 Years

Figure 1 displays an aggregate summary of the clients during July 2013 for adult clients. The table also displays the number of clients who are on probation at the start of the month and allows the reader to “drill down” and review the data by gender and race. On July 1, 2013 there were 13,229 adults on probation. Throughout the month of July, there were 268 new cases opened and 45 adults released from probation. On July 31, 2013 there were 13,452 adults on probation. The average length of time on probation for adults was 5 years.

Figure 2

Figure 2 displays the offense type breakdown for the total adult client population in July 2013. Over 95% of adult clients supervised are convicted felons. The majority of clients are placed on probation for a property (36%) or drug (26%) offense, while only 20% of clients were placed on probation for offenses against persons, and 20% for “Other Felony” offenses.

4

Figure 3

Figure 3 displays an aggregate summary of demographic information for adult probation clients. Males account for 84% of the population, while females represent 16%. African-Americans make up half of the population, Latinos clients account for 21% while Whites 20% of the client population. The remaining clients are Asian (4%) and “Other Races” (4%).

Figure 4

Adult Probation Clients by Location July 2013

Figure 4 displays the locations where adults on probation reside. The majority of adult clients reside in Oakland (41%) and Hayward (13%). San Leandro (at 6%) and Fremont (at 5%) are the next largest home residence cities for adult clients. Other communities that make up less than five percent each of the total client group. Please note: Figure 4 displays some cities which are not in Alameda County.

5

Figure 5

Service needs are identified during the initial investigation by a Deputy Probation Officer who makes a personal assessment of a client’s primary service need. Figure 5 displays primary service needs for the Banked and Formal Supervision populations. Drug and alcohol service needs make nearly half (46%) of the Banked populations’ primary needs and 36% for clients under formal supervision. Employment needs also rate high for each population, 20% and 17% respectively.

6

Re-Aligned Population July 2013

Figure 6

Between October 2011 and July 2013, 1,205 Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS) clients were released from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to Alameda County Probation Department for supervision services after the passage of AB109. Figure 6 shows the number of cases received per month. In July 2013, there were 618 active cases and the remaining 587 cases were either closed or transferred to another jurisdiction.

Figure 7

The majority of PRCS clients released from CDCR to date are African-American males and overall, non-white clients account for 96% of all PRCS clients. Females make up 8% of the total population, while males make up 92%.

7

Figure 8

As Figure 8 shows, there have been 587 violations filed on the 1,234 (48%) PRCS clients in Alameda County. Out of all violations filed, the majority (43%) have been for new arrests. 24% of violations have been filed for AWOL status which means the client stopped reporting to the ACPD sometime after their first meeting. An additional 24% were filed for no show status which means the client never reported to their first meeting with ACPD upon release from CDCR custody. The remaining clients who had violations filed were for a combination of a new arrest and a no show (3%) and Other Violations (2%).

Figure 9

There have been 225 violations filed on PRCS clients for new arrests. Figure 9 shows the percent of offense types represented by the new arrests. Most new arrest violations were for drug/alcohol arrests (35%), property offenses (27%), and offenses against persons (19%). Weapons offenses accounted for 5% of violations, while offenses against the public made up 6% of new arrest violations. Arrests in the “Other” category made up the remaining 8% of offense types. The majority of “Other” arrests were for misdemeanor offenses.

8

Juvenile Field Services- Probation July 2013

Figure 10

Demographics Start of July Cases Opened

in July Cases Closed in

July End of July

Avg. Months on Probation

# % # % # % # % #

Female 348 16% 28 17% 28 15% 348 16% 12 months

Male 1,799 84% 137 83% 162 85% 1,773 84% 18 months

Total 2,147 100% 164 100% 190 100% 2,121 100% 17 months

Black 1,238 50% 84 44% 106 56% 1,216 50% 20 months

Latino 579 21% 53 27% 52 27% 580 21% 14 months

White 182 20% 14 21% 21 11% 175 21% 10 months

Asian 97 4% 4 4% 6 3% 95 5% 12 months

Other 51 4% 9 4% 5 3% 55 4% 6 months

Total 2,147 100% 164 100% 190 100% 2,121 100% 17 months

Figure 10 displays an aggregate summary of the cases that were active in July 2013 for juvenile probationers. The table also displays the number of youth who were on juvenile probation at the start of July 2013, as well as the average length of stay for those whose cases have closed. The table allows the reader to “drill down” and review the data broken down by gender and race. On July 1, 2013 there were 2,147 youth on juvenile probation. Throughout the month of July, there were 164 youth newly placed on probation and 190 youth whose cases were closed from probation. The average length of stay for youth on juvenile probation was 17 months. *Average length of stay is only calculated for those cases that closed during the month.

Figure 11

Offense Types for Youth on Probation July 2013

Figure 11 displays the offense type breakdown for the total juvenile client population in July 2013. The

majority of clients were placed on probation for a property (28%) or person offense (26%), while 26% of clients were placed on probation for failing to obey a court order. The remaining juveniles were placed on probation for weapons offenses (7%), offenses against the public (7%), drug offenses (5%), and other offenses (1%).

9

Figure 12

City of Residence for Youth on Probation July 2013

Figure 12 displays the locations where juveniles on probation in Alameda County live. The majority of youth reside in Oakland (47%) and Hayward (15%). The remaining 38% of youth reside in a variety of communities throughout Alameda County. The “Out of County” category includes 4% of clients who reside in cities outside of Alameda County.

10

Juvenile Services- Referrals July 2013

Figure 13

In July 2013, referrals for property offenses composed the largest portion (22%) of all juvenile referrals to ACPD. Referrals for warrants were the next largest category (17%), followed by offenses against persons (16%), violations of probation (VOP 9%), and offenses against the public (7%). Both a warrant and violation of probation made up 7% of all referrals in July. Referrals for drug and alcohol offenses represented 8%, while the remaining referrals were made up of weapons offenses (3%), status offenses (1%) and “Other” offenses (10%). (Please refer to Figure 17 for a more detailed description of each offense type.)

Figure 14

Oakland and Hayward Police and Sheriffs were responsible for 46% of all referrals in July 2013. The other categories comprise just over half (54%) and include the police departments and other local law enforcement agencies throughout Alameda County.

11

Figure 15

In 2013, the number of youth referred to ACPD has remained fairly stable over the first three months and declined slightly in June and July. The percent of youth who were booked into Juvenile Hall after being referred to Probation was also consistent during this period. Youth who are not booked into Juvenile Hall are given a Notice to Appear (NTA) in Court and released.

Figure 16

Figure 16 displays an aggregate summary of demographic information for youth referred to probation. Males account for 73% of the population, while females represent 27%. African-Americans make up over half (62%) of the population, Latino clients account for 22%, while White clients make up 9% of the population. The remaining clients are Asian (3%) and “Other Races” (4%).

12

Figure 17

13

Juvenile Facilities and Alternatives to Detention July 2013

Juvenile Hall Figure 18

Figure 18 displays an aggregate summary of youth who were admitted/released to secure detention in July 2013. The table also displays the number of youth who were detained at the start of the month, as well as the average length of stay. The table allows the reader to “drill down” and review the data broken down by gender and race. On July 1, 2013 there were 198 youth at Juvenile Hall. Throughout the month of July, there were 155 new admissions and 195 releases from the facility. On July 31, 2013 there were 158 youth at Juvenile Hall. The average length of stay for youth in the Hall was 24 days.

Figure 19

Figure 19 displays a summary of the number of youth who were admitted per month at Juvenile Hall during calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013. The number of youth booked into Juvenile Hall decreased in July 2013 to 249 (down 3% from July 2012 when 258 youth were booked into the Hall and down 2% from July 2011 when 253 youth were admitted).

14

Figure 20

Figure 20 displays a summary of the number of youth who were released per month from Juvenile Hall during calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013. The number of youth released in July 2013 decreased from the previous year (down 27% from July 2012 when 332 youth were released from the Hall and down 20% from July 2011 when 306 youth were released from Juvenile Hall).

Figure 21

The majority of juveniles held in the Alameda County Juvenile Hall were detained for status offenses (35%). Person offenses were the next most prevalent offense (30%), followed by property offenses at 19%, with the remaining offenses composed of public order (5%), drugs (3%), and warrant violations (3%) and the remaining offenses making up 2% or less. (Please refer to Figure 22 for a more detailed description of each offense type.)

15

Figure 22

16

Juvenile Detention Alternatives July 2013

GPS Monitoring Figure 23

Figure 23 displays an aggregate summary of youth who were admitted/released in the Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) detention alternative program in July 2013. The table also displays the number of youth who were in GPS at the start of the month, as well as the average length of stay for those who have closed out of the program. The table allows the reader to “drill down” and review the data broken down by gender and race. On July 1, 2013 there were 181 youth in the GPS program. Throughout the month of July, there were 92 youth newly placed in the program and 120 youth released from the program. The average length of stay for youth in the program was 33 days.

Figure 24

Figure 24 displays a summary of the number of youth who were admitted per month to the GPS program during calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013.

17

Figure 25

Figure 25 displays a summary of the number of youth who were released per month from the GPS program during calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013.

18

Home Supervision Program

Figure 26

Figure 26 displays an aggregate summary of youth who were admitted/released in the Home Supervision (HS) detention alternative program in July 2013. The table also displays the number of youth who were in HS at the start of July 2013, as well as the average length of stay. The table allows the reader to “drill down” and review the data broken down by gender and race. On July 1, 2013 there were 37 youth in the Home Supervision program. Throughout the month of July, there were 13 youth newly placed in the program and 18 youth released from the program. The average length of stay for youth in the program was 31 days.

Figure 27

Figure 27 displays a summary of the number of youth who were admitted per month to the Home Supervision program during calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013.

19

Figure 28

Figure 28 displays a summary of the number of youth who were released per month from the Home Supervision program during calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013.

20

Camp Sweeney July 2013

Figure 29

Figure 29 displays an aggregate summary of youth who were admitted/released to Camp Sweeney in July 2013. The table also displays the number of youth who were placed at the start of the month. The table allows the reader to “drill down” and review the data broken down by gender and race. On July 1, 2013 there were 49 youth at Camp Sweeney. Throughout the month of July, there were 21 new admissions and 28 releases from the facility. On July 31, 2013 there were 77 youth at Camp Sweeney.

Figure 30

The majority of juveniles placed at Camp Sweeney in July 2013, were adjudicated for a failure to obey court orders (42%) and for property offenses (23%). Youth who committed persons offenses made up the next largest category (27%), while 4% of youth were ordered to Camp Sweeney as a weapons offense (4%) or a drug offense (4%).

21

Appendix Concentration of Juveniles on Probation per City/Zip Code by AGE

Figure 31

22

(figure 31, continued)

Concentration of Juveniles on Probation per City/Zip Code by Race Figure 32

23

(figure 32, continued)