recidivism reduction - arizona management systemproblem statement and scope problem statement:...

Recidivism ReductionGOAL COUNCIL 4:

SAFE COMMUNITIES

ARIZONA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM28

Actions Taken to Date

• Historical data regarding releases and returns has been gathered

• Causations have been explored• Programs have been implemented to focus efforts on those inmates at risk of recidivating– Reentry Centers


AZ Recidivism2005 – 2013

Source: Department of Corrections

12,828 13,781

14,669 15,307

16,115 15,526

14,441 14,237 13,941

5,546 6,016 6,299 6,013 6,294 5,987 5,605 5,649 5,496

43% 44%43%

39%39% 39% 39%

40% 39%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

‐

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Total Releases Releases that Recidivate Recidivism %


DefineProblem Statement

◦ Since 2011, about 5,500 Arizonans have returned to the adult corrections system annually (about 39%) within three years of their prior release. These recidivists take up bed space, require the continued expansion of the system, result in additional public spending, and fail to return to society as a productive citizen. The system cannot continue to grow sustainably and is already stretched to maximum capacity.

Scope◦ Primary scope and direct influence on technical violators who recidivate their term of Community Supervision.

◦ Secondary scope and indirect influence on all members of the adult corrections system, based in 3‐year cohorts, who may recidivate within AZ.


DefineGoal Statement

◦ In FY2015 3,318 individuals recidivated as a result of a technical violation within one year from their prior release. Two thirds of these are from Maricopa County alone.

2‐year (12/31/2018)

2‐year stretch (12/31/2018)

5‐year (12/31/2021)

5‐year stretch (12/31/2021)

15% (3,318 to 2,820)

20% (3,318 to 2,655)

20% (3,318 to 2,655)

25% (3,318 to 2,489)


Next Steps

• Near‐Term (30 Days)– Collect additional data– Assemble cross‐functional project team– Identify projects that may already be underway

• Near‐Term (60 Days)– Analyze data– Focus efforts to align with goal– Develop list of action items and subprojects across multiple agencies


Foster Care Safe ReductionGOAL COUNCIL 4:

SAFE COMMUNITIES


Why is Foster Care Reduction a Safety Initiative?

When volume exceeds capacity, safety is compromised and poor outcomes prevail(Time, Quality, Cost translates to Faster, Better, Cheaper)

Funding and resources move to the foster care crisis; creating vulnerabilities system wide.

Children and families suffer trauma when government forces separation. Citizens’ 4th Amendment rights can be violated by knee jerk, imprudent decision

making.(“Would you feel your child, or grandchild was safe if unjustifiably taken into the state’s foster care system?”)

Children spending extended periods of time in foster care have poorer outcomes. Children who age out of foster care have higher prevalence of: Homelessness, Joblessness, Victimization, Incarceration, Addiction, Etc.

Therefore, having the correct amount of children in the foster care system is imperative and makes Arizona communities safer.


(History) Increased Demands on System

Reports of child abuse/neglect increased over 60% since 2009; >52000 investigations in 2015.

The Perfect Storm hit in 2009:

Increased volume

Legislative changes

Tool changes

Absence of management system

Decreased resources (recession)

System wide impacts (courts, providers, attorneys, etc.)


Attack the Front End (All Time High)

Triage (highest risk cases)Heat Maps (brought resources to hot zones)Investigative process adherenceAccountability measures; weekly huddles; visual managementQuality assurance measuresImprovement and standardization of:◦ Hotline Screen In Criteria/Statute change◦ Safety Assessment Discussion◦ Supervisory tools ◦ Investigative workflow

Implementing Management System◦ Ensure sustainment ◦ Promote continuous improvement


Growth in Foster Care

85% Increase in Foster Care (2009 to 2015)

Last in nation (2005‐2015)


Removals per 1000 Arizona Children

Arizona’s Entry Rate has been double the national average


Foster Care per 1,000 Arizona Children

(Children under 18)

National Average 3.6

Arizona 8.7 2013

Arizona is double the national average

Mar 2016


Problem Statement and Scope Problem Statement:

◦ Arizona’s foster care population has grown 92% in the 10.5 year period ranging from 9/30/2005 through 3/31/2016, which is the largest growth nationally. Recent improvements (Feb 2016 ‐current) has demonstrated a reduction of 4% of total population.

◦ Overburdened workers are limited in their time to engage with families and have defaulted to removals out of fear and lack of real time mitigating factors.

◦ All systems are overloaded (Courts, attorneys, providers, DCS, Behavioral Health) ◦ Fiscal burdens continue rising: Placement $164M ($71M GF); OOH Service $175M ($50M GF)

◦ Children who grow up in and/or age out of the foster care have statistically shown poorer outcomes.

Scope◦ All processes supported by all state agencies and/or policy affecting the foster care population are within the scope of the project.


Recent Progress

Arizona 3%National Average 4%

Based on 7 yr trend –Population would have been 20,100


Safe Interventions

# of Children being served has remained the same for last 12 months

# of children in OOH Population has decreased 4% over this time

Same demands; different approach. Fiscal game changer


Goal – Out of Home Population Projection

2yr Conservative – 16,200

2yr Stretch – 15,200

Assumptions:

# of reports received remain constant at ~50K◦ Assumes that increased call volume will be offset by improvements in the screen in %

Resource provisions remain constant

Existing Constraints remain constant and/or improve

5yr Conservative – 13,200

5yr Stretch – 10,500


Progress through PartnershipsPartnering with Prevention Service (Fast Pass Initiative)◦ Child Care – Active◦ AHCCCS Data Sharing ‐ Active◦ SNAP, TANF and Medicaid enrollment (DES) – Oct 2016◦ Home Visits and WIC – Jan 2017

Private Contractor Partnerships – Jan 2017◦ Staff Augmentation supporting Ongoing Case reviews and Family Finding Process

Increase Engagement with Community and Faith‐based Partners◦ CARE Portal ‐ Active

Young Adult Program (YAP) Initiative – Nov 2016◦ Securing subsidized housing◦ Mentorship Program

Juvenile Court Collaboration ‐ Active◦ Safe Reduction work group (5 sub groups)◦ Court Improvement Project addressing training and coaching for court staff around judicial review of child welfare cases.


Continuing Progress/Ensuring Fidelity

Closely monitoring two areas for unwanted outcomes:1. Re‐reports of abuse/neglect involving

the same child(ren)2. Re‐entry into foster care post

reunification or adoption

• Continue with technical assistance to improve the safety model, improve decision making ‐ Active

• Statewide review of all cases to identify recurring barriers requiring resolution ‐ Active

• Family Finding to Reduce Congregate Care‐ Active• Increased use of In‐Home Services• Launch of multiple prevention initiatives


recidivism reduction - arizona management systemproblem statement and scope problem statement:...

Documents