October 20, 2017 Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board Meeting

Audience

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

Date/Time

October 20, 2017
9:30am to 11:30am 

Location

This meeting will be conducted via video conference with Chicago & Springfield Locations as follows:

• Chicago: 401 Clinton Building, 7th Floor Executive video conference room
• Springfield: 100 South Grand Ave East-Harris Building, 3rd Floor Executive video conference room
• Call In:  888-494-4032/Code:5329547331#

Agenda

1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
   RIOB meeting August 18, 2017
4. Staff updates
5. Ethics update
6. FY18 Fiscal Update
   1. July and August FY18 Redeploy expenditures
   2. July and August FY18 ICOY expenditures and Redeploy Focused update
7. FY18 Site Updates
   1. 2016 Site Compliance
   2. July and August FY18 number served / commitments
   3. Site Visits - DJJ/eligibility/DMC Analysis and plan
8. Data Workgroup Update
9. Redeploy Planning Grant Update
10. First Circuit presentation (Jessica Beatty)
11. 2016 First Circuit Compliance/Penalty Discussion and Decision
12. Next Meeting
    Next Full Board Meeting: December 15th, 2017
13. Adjourn

Minutes

1. Call to Order
   The meeting was called to order at 9:32am
2. Roll Call
   Karrie Rueter, Paula Wolff, George Timberlake, Tim Snowden, Rick Velasquez, Mary Reynolds, Tracy Senica and Anthony Harden Representing Pam Rodriguez. Garien Gatewood representing Betsy Clarke
   Staff and Guests: Mary Ann Dyer, Erica Hughes, Kristen Marshall, Steve Sawyer, John Payne (appearing by phone), Lindsey LaPointe, Heather Hazelwood, Jessica Beatty, Amanda McMillen, Olivia Wilks, and Danielle Kindle.
3. Staff Updates
   Olivia Wilks, the new Juvenile Justice Programs Director at ICOY introduced herself. Olivia will be working half time on Redeploy and half time for the JJ Commission with a primary focus on DMC.  Tracy Senica, Assistant, Cook County State's Attorney, supervisor on the juvenile delinquency side, introduced herself. Tracy will be replacing Scott Clark on the Board. 
4. Ethics update All Board members completed their mandatory ethics training.   
5. Approval of Minutes
   The Board discussed the minutes from the August 18, 2017 board meeting.
   Motion: Rick Velazquez motioned to approve the minutes from the August 18, 2017
   Board meeting. Paula Wolff seconded the motion.
   Decision: The Board approved the minutes from the August 18, 2017 board meeting.
6. FY18 Fiscal Update
   Karrie Rueter circulated and reviewed several documents including:
   • July and August FY18 Redeploy expenditures - Karrie informed the Board that staff anticipate the zero amounts in 4th circuit and Winnebago County will be changing.
   • July and August FY18 ICOY expenditures and Redeploy Focused update - DHS staff reported that the ICOY expenditures had been finalized the morning of the meeting. Each month is broken down, with a narrative explaining in more detail what the expenses were for. It was explained that the expenditures were reported in a new format for FY18 and this is ICOY's first time using the report.
     A board member requested to see the monthly sheets as well as the cumulative and the approved budget. Karrie Rueter reported that the full report will be included at the next RIOB meeting and will be inclusive of each of the identified documents.
7. FY18 Site Updates
   Staff provided a handout to update members regarding recent site visits. All sites were visited by staff over the past month. Site visits focused on participant eligibility; DMC Analysis and plan; and contract compliance.
   Karrie Rueter highlighted additional documents in the packet that was distributed to the board. These included commitments and monthly numbers served; a Redeploy Focused Program update; Data Workgroup meeting summaries; and updated redeploy planning grant county eligibility. Karrie also explained that staff have completed a cursory review of the 2016 DJJ data to determine compliance the for 2016 program year. A chart was distributed that showed everyone was in compliance with two exceptions: Sangamon County, which increased commitments, and 1st circuit, which exceeded by two. The 1st Circuit has representatives present to discuss the 2016 implementation year and answer any compliance or other questions. Karrie Rueter explained that the First Circuit had already been asked to present on their program for this meeting and has agreed to be prepared to address questions regarding compliance. Staff also provided a few handouts to inform the compliance discussion, including the actual DJJ data utilized to determine compliance.  Board members made a request of staff to organize materials and handouts in such a manner in the future to allow for members to more easily identify handouts being discussed - such as colored paper.
8. Data Workgroup Update
   Documents were circulated summarizing the data workgroup meetings on October 3rd and 10th, 2017. To allow the 1st Circuit ample time to present at the current meeting, discussion was postponed to the next Board meeting.
9. Redeploy Planning Grant update
   Documents were circulated discussing 2018 Redeploy Planning Grant Eligibility. To allow the 1st Circuit ample time to present at the current meeting, discussion of this document was postponed until the next Board meeting.
10. First Circuit presentation (Jessica Beatty)
    Prior to the First Circuit presentation, staff provided an overview of the DJJ data for the First circuit. DHS staff explained that program compliance and cost avoidance by site used formulas that have been used since the beginning. Since implementing the program, the reductions have been numerically large. When looking at the DJJ data, Jackson and Saline Counties are having the largest impact on the numbers in that circuit; the commitments are coming from these counties. As can be seen, most committed youth in 2016 were Redeploy-eligible, although there was 1 Class X felony. The rest on the counties' combined total sent 1 youth. There were 10 total commitments across all of the counties: 4 from Saline, which were all court evaluations; 1 from Massac; and 5 from Jackson, all of which were initial commitments. There was 1 parole violator from a new offense. Judge Timberlake asked if any of those were coming from DJJ and DHS staff responded that they were not.
    Karrie Rueter asked for clarification of the 3-year baseline number for all three years and if it was correct. DHS staff clarified that all three should say "12". John Payne pointed out a potential error in the DJJ data report - court evaluation returns under Class 3 total appeared incorrect. Karrie Rueter stated that it is not uncommon that mistakes in documents are identified. Normally this is caught before being presented to the board, but this one was missed. A board member asked if people from the 1st circuit have seen these numbers and confirmed that they are right. Jessica from the First Circuit stated yes that they ave reviewed and that yes it was accurate. However, she indicated that internally she had received conflicting information. She also shared that she had no knowledge of these court evaluations until about 2 weeks ago and multiple people did not know that this had happened. After speaking to the defense attorney, she was not able to confirm whether number is 4 or 2, but can confirm that it has been happening.
    Karrie Rueter stated that staff will reach out to DJJ to find the specific information behind the data in order to cross check and see where they are and are not in agreement.
    Karrie Rueter then invited Jessica Beatty to begin her presentation. Jessica Beatty invited Heather Hazelwood to speak first.
    Heather Hazelwood reported that a core group of people met and discussed a planning grant to come up with an application. She stated that they did not anticipate a lot of dedicated pushback to helping children with services and not sending kids to jail, and thus would have appreciated guidance on this matter. In meeting with each stakeholder, they approached people that they knew and many were committed to supporting and signing the letter. However, there were concerns about money coming in and money being cut off, so many did not want to try. Mild concerns were expressed about penalties for reductions and how that affects judicial decision making. Heather Hazelwood stated that Michelle had difficulties even getting access to data because it was necessary for judges to sign orders for this. Activities have been seen as an attack on the judiciary. Heather Hazelwood added that they have engaged with people that are running for judgeships and who may be replacing current judges on a ground level, so they are hopeful for this to occur in order to increase cooperation.
    Jessica Beatty continued the presentation by discussing the details about what has been happening on the ground. One of the first things done was MST, the gold standard for working with families. One initial problem was that information provided by the MST corporation is not how service actually plays out, leading to unrealistic expectations. There was an assumption that MST was going to do everything that was needed. In reality, they identified the most pressing matters in the home and environment that were contributing to criminal activity and then focused on those, with the majority of time focused on parent training. Jessica Beatty emphasized that this is a great approach and data shows that MST is better than no MST, but there was a discrepancy with what was told to stakeholders and what actually occurred, leading to frustrations by stakeholders.
    A board member asked if there was a belief on behalf of probation that MST would take care of everything and their services were thus not needed. Jessica Beatty stated that probation does not feel responsible for providing services, even in the absence of MST, though they should be doing everything that they can. Judge Timberlake recommended learning not only what judges are turning over, but also what probation individuals are turning over.
    Jessica Beatty stated that this is not a thing that happens in the 1st circuit. They are not doing YASIs for the large portion of the youth. They have a service plan that does not actually talk about services. Sometimes probation officers will help youth get into drug treatment, but there is not a written plan that is shared with the family or anyone. Heather Hazelwood stated she has been struggling with probation at her courthouse due to a lack of understanding of the job requirements. She put in court orders that YASIs and case plans are required and has still had issues with these being done. She consulted a judge, who stated that they would meet with the probation officers. She stated that she is hopeful that new supervision and interest from the bench will be helpful. Heather Hazelwood added that the supervisor for Union County supervises 5 counties.
    A board member asked who the field supervisor for probation for AO was. Jessica Beatty did not know and the board member recommended meeting this person immediately. Jessica Beatty stated that this would create backlash, but it was clarified that it would only be to meet this person. Another board member clarified that going around the system sometimes creates pushback. A board member emphasized that there is a resource there whose job it is to support, monitor, train, etc. probation departments. Karrie Rueter offered that this may be a place they can help to make a contact and check in how things are going.
    Heather Hazelwood stated that she and Jessica Beatty have discussed how to get people involved and (re)invigorated regarding Redeploy. While the judge is supportive, she stated that they need stronger support and more focus on problems and solutions. During the budget impasse, they did not see a point in speaking with judges. Jessica Beatty stated that there is a new court services director and they have had some contact. He was the assistant of the previous director and she has not seen any change in the expectations of probation officers since he took on this new role.
    Jessica stated that MST consultants are the frontline for connections with stakeholders. Although they are their major outreach, they are often silenced from talking about certain topics and to certain people. The regional consultants do not communicate regularly. Jessica stated that she would try reaching out to them. A board member added that it may be helpful to specifically reference financial reasons that it is in their benefit to help.
    Jessica Beatty reported that youth with few or no infractions are still viewed from probation as belonging in prison, thinking this is the only thing that works. MST therapists feel that probation expects perfection from clients. Therapists are often met with backlash, argument, and low referral numbers. Probation staff insists on doing things such as cleaning a dirty house rather than following the MST model. Jessica Beatty stated that there is also a lack of basic MST literacy, partially due to unrealistic expectations and MST literature generally.
    Jessica Beatty reported that she has been faced with those holding the financial power telling her that she should not advocate for the problem and instead be quiet and listen to what they said was best. Jessica Beatty also noted that at the start of the grant project, they were not aware of probation's failure to do YASIs case plans, etc., causing added difficulties because they do not have the authority to enforce probation responsibilities. Within a week or two of reporting to DHS, one probation officer was reported to AOIC, which was detrimental to getting probation, a close group of people, on board with plan. The probation officers who signed up to receive training and provide groups decided the training was not worth it and then refused to provide groups.
    Jessica Beatty reported additional stakeholder issues: a belief that punishment is the only thing that works and juveniles thus need to go to prison; rejection of case plans so that youths receive no services; getting probation on board for a plan that they do not believe in and do not see as part of their job requirements; low emphasis of evidence-based services.
    Jessica Beatty reported that Redeploy case plans currently consist of writing down youth activities and putting them in a folder; they are Redeploy-specific. Jessica Beatty emphasized that getting probation on board could be so much more beneficial because knowledgeable people should, at startup and during difficult times, ensure that contract team is engaging key people in service selection process. Jessica Beatty provided an example: after WAIT failed, the program was eliminated and left MST as the only program. However, they were told later in a Redeploy All-Sites meeting that offering only one service is inadequate; there should be a spectrum.
    There was a meeting where probation officers were asking about implementing ideas, but the importance of evidence-based practices was not emphasized enough. At the JJC meeting, speaking to the same people, they were coming up with plans for services and the overwhelming majority had to be scrapped or modified because they were not incorporating evidence-based models. This was frustrating and alienating for stakeholders who had worked to develop plans. The Redeploy meeting emphasized evidence-based models repeatedly, but this was challenging because their perception was that they had been told they could do anything as long as it was formalized as a plan. Many had been advocating for replacing MST with FFT and until they realized that MST was more intensive; it was not accurately portrayed by MST consultants. WAIT was replaced with Crossroads because it was developed by probation officers. Plans were set to implement this service until probation officers changed their minds about providing this, stating a lack of interest.
    Jessica Beatty summarized the overall probation issues: high caseloads; a view that enrollment in this program is burdensome; frustration that referral form provided by Jessica Beatty was too long, even after shortening, stating it is a deterrent to referral. Jessica Beatty stated that the main issue is that there is little oversight over case management. It is essential that RIOB have an AOIC member on it.
    Jessica Beatty reported that during the budget impasse, probation stated that they were not going to do the Crossroads group. They ended up partnering with SIU to use paid MSW candidates to provide groups. Two sites on the JJC side were extremely successful with this. However, with Redeploy and unlike JJC, they did not have funding to provide transportation, so youth did not show up. In four meetings, only one person showed up once. Additionally, there was a significant delay in MSW candidates receiving pay to the extent that this did not occur until approximately one year after graduation. Knowledge of this delay deterred perspective applicants the following year, hindering the ability to offer the Crossroads groups that year.
    During the impasse, it also became necessary to cut funding for all services except Jessica Beatty's pay, who is now part time. MST did not receive payment for over a year, adding up to well over $100K owed. For a large portion of time Union county did not have cash flow to fund services. Lack of services in addition to MST and lack of financial supports, specifically for ankle bracelets, were the primary hindrances to perspective program participants. In regard to the ankle bracelet funding, Jessica Beatty noted that if a youth is a danger to the community, but there is no funding for leg monitor, those monitors are historically self-pay. Thus, if family does not have funds, the youth must be locked up. This resulted in lower referrals than had been seen historically. Before the impasse, there were 20-25 per year, while after there were 10-15 per year. The effect of the budget impasse has therefore been detrimental to both services offered and engaging stakeholders.
    Heather stated that the impasse came at a hard time for her particular site because they had finally come to understand what was necessary and were on a momentum of engagement. Due to the impasse, they could not continue with this positive forward movement.
    Jessica Beatty reported issues with new eligibility requirements to enroll a youth in Redeploy. When the state passed the budget, they could not open services immediately until cash flow began. There were misinterpretations that led to simple things like monthly EDFs taking hours to complete, only to learn that the time had been wasted and they did not have to do all they just had. In the meantime, the legislature took actions to eliminate misdemeanors and then drug felonies and several other felonies from eligibility for Redeploy. When these youths could not be served by Redeploy, this led to a negative impact on stakeholders, who perceived that the focus was more on money than helping kids. 
    Jessica Beatty reported that the new eligibility requirements are leading to a failure to utilize the window of opportunity when youth can be best served. There has also been a pattern of incentivizing states attorneys to charge youth with higher crimes because this is necessary for youth to access the services. However, it is the opposite of what is needed to de-escalate movement in system and thus reduce criminal activity. Research has also shown that connecting with youth as young as possible is most successful.
    Jessica Beatty explained the "Data Points" document. There were 61 total youth admitted and 49% were rearrested. Jessica Beatty explained that technical violations are not on chart, which takes new adjudications down to 43%. If broken down by age, the numbers are drastically different. When services start at age 12-15, 30% are rearrested, while when services stare at age 16-17, 64% are rearrested. If the new eligibility requirements had been in place, 27 of the 62 documented referrals would not have been eligible for services. The numbers show that interventions with MST are effective; youth who receive MST have a 48% re-arrest rate compared to 55% for youth who do not receive MST. 54% of youth who receive MST have new adjudications/PTR findings compared to 73% of youth who do not receive MST.
    Jessica Beatty reported that MST is a fixed cost program and that the grant fully funds the MST program unless they are able to find another grant to fund a portion. By keeping eligibility requirements where they are, they are effectively putting themselves at the mercy of the team being able to find other funding. A board member asked if the grant is part of the DCFS contract. Jessica Beatty stated that the funding source is a grant that covers court-involved youth, youth on parole, etc. She does not believe it is the DCFS contract. Another board member clarified that the fixed amount means if fewer people are eligible, they are paying more for those who are. Jessica Beatty added that if more are eligible, they can't send the referral.
    Jessica Beatty summarized the issue of commitments to DJJ in 2016. There were 10 commitments to DJJ in 2016 and they were supposed to have 8 to meet the reduction requirement. Statewide data on outcomes for youth shows 86% re-arrest and 68% re-incarcerated. MST data is substantially lower, but services are being postponed to a point where judges may have lost patience. Jessica Beatty stated that, given all of the issues that have been discussed, there are a couple crucial points to consider in the decision on whether or not the 1st circuit should receive a penalty. First, the baseline does not include 17 year olds and Jessica Beatty recommended thus reestablishing the baseline. Second, dealing with low numbers leads to violating the baseline even if the reduction averages 50%. Low numbers mean 2 youth can make the difference between meeting and not meeting goal. Third, it is perceived that the 25% requirement is removing judicial discretion, requiring them to put their communities at risk, while they are not listening to the fact that they have been making decisions that are hurting kids. Jessica Beatty recommended that, at least for an initial period, the 25% requirement should be eliminated or changed to a lifetime rather than annual requirement. The 25% reduction will occur when services are effective.
    Jessica Beatty concluded by stating that requiring the payment of a penalty does not adequately reflect the 1st circuit's successes, including a number of services focused on delinquency, an increase of commitments to DJJ by 50%, and seeing improved outcomes for youth. Jessica Beatty made a final recommendation that when a new site comes in or when a site needs to be rehabilitated, it must be provided site training and a training manual. Uninformed sites can do damage that takes years to undo, which can be avoided through knowledge.
11. 2016 First Circuit Compliance/Penalty Discussion and Decision
    Board members complimented Jessica's presentation, and obvious commitment to project and understanding of the issues. Board members agreed that obstacles (eligibility, baseline ages, etc.) have confounded what services are available and also agreed that a longer startup period may be a good idea. Judge Timberlake stated the JJC is working on a technical assistance package that is more in-depth, but that the difficulty is that part of the success of Redeploy is that each site makes its own plan. Thus, there is a fine line to be drawn between telling communities what to do and enabling communities to do what is useful. He described Jessica Beatty's experience as a microcosm for what is happening across the state.
    Jessica Beatty responded on the issue of a training manual that it would simply need to provide basic literacy regarding evidence-based practices, resources to find them, etc. Karrie Rueter added that the manual would need to be less about how to operate a program and more about providing the tools to design and sell it. A board member stated that this could be thought of as a template for resources and also an example of what is being done in other jurisdictions, including names of others who have faced similar issues. Heather Hazelwood added that it may be helpful if DHS staff had more access to ask what is happening/being offered and try to identify problem areas, thus being able to gently ask why certain things are not happening.
    Board members felt they had enough information to make a decision regarding the imposition of a penalty. Jessica Beatty and Heather Hazelwood stepped out of the room to allow the Board to discuss. Karrie Rueter made sure they understood that they did not have to step out as this is an open meeting.
    Motion: Paula Wolff motioned that a penalty should not be imposed for this period and technical support should be provided. Judge Timberlake seconded the motion.
    Decision: The motion was approved by the Board.
    Jessica Beatty and Heather Hazelwood reentered the room. Karrie Rueter officially informed them that there was a unanimous decision to not require a penalty, largely due to the budget impasse. Other things that were discussed will be considered in future meetings.
12. Next Meeting:
    Karrie Rueter stated that this meeting's discussion did not include detailed updates on site visits, the data workgroup, and conversations regarding target population. Karrie Rueter made a recommendation to flip the executive and full committee meetings so that the next full committee meeting will be in November. The board agreed.
    The next RIOB Full Board Meeting is scheduled: November 17th, 2017 at 9:30 a.m.
13. Adjourn
    Mary Reynolds made a motion to adjourn. Tim Snowden seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 11:46 a.m.