May 5, 2017 Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board Meeting


Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board Members and Staff. The public is welcome to attend.


Friday, May 5, 2017
11:00am to 1:00pm 


This meeting will be conducted at the Hyatt Lodge at McDonalds Campus 
2815 Jorie Blvd., Oak Brook, IL


  1. Call to Order/Roll Call
  2. Approval of Minutes
    • March 3rd, 2017
  3. Program Updates
  4. Payments/Spending
    1. Program Expenditures/numbers served and commitments
    2. Program Site Updates (Budget Impact)
    3. ICOY Budget Update
    4. Redeploy Focused Update
    5. FY18 NOFO's
  5. All Sites Meeting Update
  6. RIOB Planning Meeting Update
  7. Decisions Regarding Redeploy Program Changes
  8. Legislative Changes/Recommendations
  9. Next Meeting
    • June 16, 2017 9:30-11:30am
  10. Adjourn


  1. Call to Order
    The meeting was called to order at 11 A.M.
  2. Roll Call
    Karrie Rueter, George Timberlake, Janet Ahern, Scott Clark, Paula Wolff, Peter Parry, Betsy Clarke, Jim McCarter, Pam Rodriguez, , and Rick Velasquez. Staff and Guests: Erica Hughes, Kristen Marshall, Angie Jimenez, John Payne, and Steve Sawyer.
  3. Approval of Minutes
    The Board discussed the minutes from the March 3, 2017 board meeting.
    Motion: Paula Wolff motioned to approve the minutes from the March 3, 2017 board meeting. Rick Velasquez seconded the motion.
    Decision: The Board approved the minutes from the March 3, 2017 board meeting.
  4. Program Updates
    Karrie Rueter circulated and reviewed several documents with the including:
    • FY17 Payments/Spending/Number Served and Commitments -Karrie shared spreadsheets reflecting expenditures for FY17, the number of youth served as reported by the sites, and number of commitments to DJJ from each of the Redeploy sites. Most sites incurred expenses and were reimbursed in December 2016 through appropriations via the stopgap spending plan. Currently, no sites are being reimbursed for the second half of FY17 since there is no appropriation.
    • Program Site Updates (Budget Impact)-during an all sites call with program staff, the sites shared how the state budget impasse has impacted their Redeploy programs regarding capacity and services. A one-page summary was provided for Board members.
    • ICOY Budget Update-The Board received a document outlining expenses incurred by Youth Network Council/ICOY for July 2016-March 2017 towards the Redeploy program.
    • Redeploy Focused Update-For FY17, no applications have been submitted for Redeploy Focused funds. Angie Jimenez reported that she has spoken with probation staff in Ogle County, and they may be applying.
    • FY18 NOFOs-Karrie informed the Board that Sangamon County does not plan to apply for FY18 and that the 4th Circuit, who we thought might not apply, has already submitted an application for FY18.
      Motion: Pam Rodriguez motioned to approve the program updates provided. Rick Velasquez seconded the motion.
      Decision: The Board approved the program updates.
  5. All Sites Update
    The sites gathered for a two-day All Sites Meeting on March 14 and 15. During the meeting, the sites discussed successes and challenges they have experienced and potential suggestions for the Board. The Board received a document that included several recommendations and questions to consider during its two-day planning meeting. On May 4, site representatives from St. Clair County and the 2nd Judicial Circuit reviewed that document in detail and answered questions from the Board.
    During the Board's discussion following the sites' presentation, the Board indicated that the presentation and dialogue with the sites was enlightening and helpful and agreed to extend an invitation to all the sites to attend future RIOB meetings to share their program plans with the Board. The Board also agreed to send letters to each of the presenters to thank them.
  6. RIOB Planning Meeting Update/Decisions Regarding Program Plan Changes
    The Board convened a two-day planning meeting on May 4 and 5. After a data presentation and presentation from site representatives, the Board examined the following items in detail to help better shape the future of the program:
    • Data Collection-The Board discussed data that they would like to have available to review to help inform decisions regarding potential program plan changes. The Board is seeking information that would explain why referred youth may not be accepted into the Redeploy program. Karrie said that the preliminary data shows that on average, the Redeploy youth are medium risk level and 40% of youth enrolled in Redeploy are facing misdemeanor charges.
      There is data specifically from DJJ that the Board indicated they would like to review. The Board is seeking data that provides a profile on those youths over the past year who continue to be committed (including the committing offense, length of stay, services during and on Aftercare, offense history, assessments performed, if they were referred to Redeploy, which ones are eligible for Redeploy and which counties are they coming from, length of time on probation, the detention practice).
      The Board also discussed establishing a Data Group comprising representatives from DJJ, AOIC, research institutions and the judiciary. The Board stressed the need to have data on youth outcomes and having data to help answer the following questions:
      • What is the criteria from sites for referral/acceptance?
      • Why are youth at risk of DJJ commitment not being referred to Redeploy?
      • Have detention stays increased?
        Baselines/Eligible Populations/Penalties-Board members discussed the history of and recent changes to eligible populations and the potential impact on and possible changes to baselines and penalties.
        Suggestions included: instead of establishing and enforcing a penalty phase for existing sites who have been highly successful in meeting reduction requirements, the Board might consider transitioning into a maintenance phase for sites recognizing that DJJ eligibility has changed and that many youths charged with misdemeanors are likely to be on trajectory to DJJ, possibly consider allowing providers to target a percent reduction in detention; possibly incentivize further reductions; and possibly reevaluate sites' baselines by incorporating current statute changes, commitment reduction history, types of youth being committed and permit smaller reductions. An additional suggestion was to, after maybe after a 5-year period the Board could require the site to undertake another planning grant like process, the result of which would result in a more current assessment of the youth that continue to be committed and their needs, etc. It may also reinvigorate stakeholders, and could provide a new basis for the Board to consider revised reduction targets or possibly even waiving the reduction requirement based on certain conditions.
        Medicaid- Board members requested data to be able to look at the services offered by existing sites that could potentially be covered under Medicaid. This included an indication of which providers could become Medicaid-certified. The discussion was primarily about how the Board can better leverage dollars.
  7. Legislative Changes/Recommendations
    The Board discussed the impact of recently enacted legislation that narrows the eligibility of youth who can now face commitment to DJJ and the impact that has on their eligibility to the Redeploy program. While the types of youth who can be committed to DJJ have changed with the passage of different reform measures, the overall intent and purpose of the Redeploy statute is to encourage deinstitutionalization and reallocate state funds to local jurisdictions to establish a continuum of services in the community for youth. They noted that only enrolling eligible youth bound for DJJ ties the sites' hands as the site representatives indicated during their presentation.
    The Board discussed the possibility of extending the population to include the detention population. Pros and Cons were discussed including that juvenile detention centers would have to close in order to show significant savings.  Members also discussed drafting a press release and the idea of featuring a story on a regular basis from the families.
  8. Next Meeting:
    The next RIOB Full Board Meeting is scheduled: June 16, 2017 at 9:30 a.m.
    While discussing future meeting, the Board members agreed to schedule some future meetings in southern Illinois to help ensure participation from potentially new board members from downstate.
    Staff agreed to review the bylaws and the OMA to see if the Board can establish a set number for a quorum vs. the 51% requirement.
  9. Adjourn
    Pam Rodriguez made a motion to adjourn. Rick Velasquez seconded the motion.  The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 p.m.