December 13, 2019 Redeploy Illinois Oversight Board Meeting

Audience

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

Date/Time

Friday, December 13th, 2019

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: Harris Building, 3rd Floor Executive video conference room

Agenda

Call to order/Roll call
Redeploy Board member updates
Approval of Minutes
NOFO Exemption requests update
ICJIA evaluation update
Expenditures and commitments/number served
Provider program and funding decisions
1. Winnebago County
2. St. Clair County
CY2020 RIOB meeting schedule
Redeploy Program model discussion/decisions
Membership work group recommendations/decisions
NOFO updates
1. Planning Grant/New Site
2. Planning Grant/Detention Pilot Program
3. Assessment
Outreach efforts
Data Work Group update
Adjourn

Minutes

Call to Order/Roll Call: The meeting was called to order at 9:32 am
Board Members: In Person: Anne Studzinski, Janet Ahern, Jason Stamps, Rick Velasquez, Pam Rodriguez, Betsy Clarke, Paula Wolff, Omar Jamil (designee for Heidi Mueller), Tracy Senica, Karrie Rueter, Rich Adkins, Judge George Timberlake
Staff/Guests: Secretary Grace Hou, Garien Gatewood, Kristen Marshall, Erica Hughes, Kadima Palles, and Olivia Wilks,
Redeploy Board member updates: Paula Wolff reported that Chief Justice Burke will be considering and distributing the Redeploy Board's request for three Board appointments from the court. Rich Adkins announced that this was his final meeting and Dan Hunt would be his replacement at AOIC and with the Redeploy Board.
Approval of Minutes: The Board discussed the minutes from the October 13th, 2019 Board meeting.
Motion: Pam Rodriguez made a motion to approve the minutes from the October 13th, 2019 Board meeting. Anne Studzinski seconded the motion.
Decision: Motion Passed.
NOFO Exemption requests update: Karrie Rueter reported that because the Board has enough resources to fund all potential applicants that may respond to prospective Funding Notices. Karrie discussed this several months ago with GATU and was told it should be okay to post the Funding Notices as non-competitive. Additionally, Ms. Rueter also requested that existing sites would not have to re-compete. The Board made final decisions about the Funding Notices. Ms. Rueter formally submit the request. The Funding Notices exemption requests were submitted in mid-September. She has provided additional information as requested, and at this time she is still waiting for approval.
The request included three exemptions: 1. Combine the planning grant and full site Funding Notice into one two-phase non-competitive Funding Notice; 2. The Redeploy detention pilot would also combine the planning and implementation phases into one non-competitive funding notice; 3. To allow existing full/established sites to continue without re-competing
Ms. Rueter discussed with Secretary Hou the delay in a response from GATU and asked the Secretary follow up. Secretary Hou agreed and asked for Ms. Rueter to forward her the exemption request. Ms. Rueter informed the Board that the Funding Notice is written and ready to post once the Board receives a decision on the exemption request. Ms. Rueter asked whether the Funding Notice still needed to be posted for a full 30 days. Anne Studzinski responded that if the Board gets exemption approval between now and 12/25 the Funding Notice should be left open for the full 30 days to accommodate for the upcoming holidays. Members agreed.
ICJIA evaluation update: Ms. Hughes reported that ICJIA is still cleaning and re-coding the data for auditing. This process is taking longer than expected because staff had to hand enter all data as it was delivered in multiple electronic files. Ms. Hughes anticipates finishing the audit towards the end of February.
Expenditures and commitments/number served: Members expressed concerns about the number of youth served based on the expenditure amount. Mr. Velasquez asked about the 13th circuit, which appeared to serve 2 youth, but spent $87,000. Erica Hughes explained that that number was new youth, not total youth. The Board asked for more clear and thorough data, such as duplicated vs unduplicated numbers, length of stay, services rendered, etc. A suggestion was made that it might be worth selecting a baseline timeline like a month or quarter so that the Board can better review the total youth served in comparison to expenditures in order to better determine the cost per youth. Others agreed that the Board needs more comprehensive data and requested that the Board get information on the length of program service per youth as well as the kind of services youth are getting. Ms. Studzinski suggested that the data work group would come up with a semi-annual report that goes more in depth than the board meeting fiscal report.
Provider program and funding decisions: Ms. Rueter suggested that if the board approves the following requests, the approval will not affect the board's ability to post non-competitive Funding Notices. Betsy Clarke asked that as the Board expands services to lower level youth, they include in each application- as a reminder to each site- that there will be no increase in detention.
1. Winnebago County requested funds to expand their services for juveniles charged with Class X Felonies. Winnebago included the following details that outline their ability to expand to meet this higher need population:
  1. All referrals will be post-adjudication
  2. The county currently employs a part time therapist that has been successful working with higher need/risk youth. They are hoping to move him to full time, especially as this therapist sees youth that are typically waitlisted for therapy. He has a connection that refers Redeploy youth to him that he can see sooner than they would regularly be seen.
  3. The county is trying to keep up with Judge Lowry, who is supportive of Redeploy and has been referring a larger than normal amount of youth to the program. The Judge's efforts have also impacted detention and the number of youth detained has decreased dramatically in recent months.
  4. Service providers have been writing case plan based on their IMCANS assessment to determine needs, services and intensity level to better serve Redeploy youth.
    A member suggested that providers should verify that they have the service array that they need to take on this population and track their provided services for the expansion.
    Motion: Judge George Timberlake made a motion to approve the request for additional funding. Janet Ahern seconded the motion.
    Decision: The motion passed.
2. St. Clair County has requested additional funding to implement programming that addresses an increase in gun violence. The details in the application include
  1. They would like to serve 10 youth with Class A misdemeanors
  2. To serve the 10 youth, they envision re-implementing a previously successful weapons offender program.
    Rich Adkins expressed concern that this program would include more probation and/or electronic monitoring. He wanted more clarification about what this program entails. Betsy Clarke expressed concerned about the expansions intention to net widen, citing sweeps and arrests in certain targeted neighborhoods. Judge George Timberlake questioned how new program therapists would be supervised as, based on the proposed salaries, their job would be considered entry level. Some Board members echoed these concerns, therefore Judge George Timberlake asked if it would better to postpone the vote and get more information before proceeding. Rick Velasquez asked if the Board will be able to follow and monitor whether additional funding creates better outcomes or has a stronger impact for the agencies that receive approval. Ms. Rueter indicated that DHS can look at services by offense, but there will need to be changes made to the eCornerstone system to track data related to many of the Board's concerns. The Board suggested that Erica Hughes go back to have a conversation with St. Clair to address these questions in anticipation of the January 24th Executive meeting.
    Motion: Anne Studzinski made a motion to have staff meet with St Clair to clarify and answer questions for the Board and to revisit the proposal at the January 24th Executive Meeting. Jason Stamps seconded the motion.
    Decision: The motion was approved.
CY2020 RIOB meeting schedule: Judge George Timberlake suggested moving the January 17th Executive Committee to January 24th.
Motion: Rick Velasquez made a motion to approve the schedule with the proposed change, Paula Wolff seconded.
Decision: Motion passed.
Redeploy Program model discussion/decisions: No discussion
Membership work group recommendations/decisions: Ms. Rueter reported that Mary Reynolds left the Redeploy Board because of a new professional role. The total number of Board members is down to 13, with almost 100% of engagement and/or representation in Board meetings. The Secretary has the ability to appoint up to 9 members beyond those identified in legislation. Currently, 5 of these positions are filled, leaving room for 4 additional appointments. Secretary Hou requested a description of the criteria used by the Workgroup to make recommendations. Garien Gatewood indicated that the workgroup was looking for people with lived experience, people who had policy experience, people who had been impacted by Redeploy through their time in DJJ/detention, and those who would be engaged in Board meetings. Rick Velasquez added that, in regard to service provider criteria, the Workgroup was looking at those who have extensive experience within organizations and/or individually in working with the Redeploy target population. Additionally, the Workgroup indicated that they considered geographic indicators in order to have representation from urban and rural areas. Members stressed that it was important to consider the racial and ethnic make-up of the board as well as potential conflicts of interest for service providers that are getting funded by the Board. It was suggested that there may be a conflict of interest to have ICOY board members sit on the Redeploy board. Ms. Rueter suggested that there are certainly precautions DHS can take to avoid conflicts of interest if necessary. It was suggested that there are many service providers that have extensive experience that would not create a conflict of interest or need to recuse themselves and that the Board should consider that path. Secretary Hou advised that the Board could consider looking outside of representation from those with lived experience and service providers. She suggested individuals working within the foundation community, business community and/or academia. Betsy Clarke agreed and suggested someone from the Bar Association. Additionally, Janet Ahern suggested someone from a law school or law enforcement, especially if the Board is looking for those with other avenues to represent and advertise the Board. Jason Stamps seconded what the Secretary stated, indicating that these outside resources, as long as they stay engaged, can be more beneficial for expanding Redeploy's reach. He also expressed the preference for having a professionally and ideologically diverse board as. He suggested that when members disagree, challenge each other and engage in difficult dialogue, more innovative work gets done. Karrie Rueter also advised that not all of the individuals referred to the Chief Justice may be approved. This means the Board could still recommend those people for the additional slots. It was suggested to wait until the Court's decision before discussing further recommendations except for those with lived experience. Garien Gatewood advised that the workgroup can reconvene and reassess to address these sectors. Rich Adkins reminded the workgroup members to considering vetting potential candidates to make sure they, in some capacity, share the vision/mission of the Board.
Motion: Pam Rodriguez made a motion that the Board reach out to the people the workgroup has recommended to fill the role of a representative with lived experience to assess their availability and interest. Paula Wolff seconded the motion.
Decision: Motion approved
Garien Gatewood advised he would call the people recommended to the Chief Justice. Paula Wolff suggested DHS could review how many times the Board has met annually over the last 3 years to give nominees an idea of the commitment. Secretary Hou suggested that the Board also consider geographic location of lived experience representatives. Anne Studzinski suggested that if the two nominees with lived experience do not accept appointment the workgroup should consider a female with lived experience in their place. Jason Stamps requested to be added to the Membership workgroup. Rick Velasquez suggested that the Board create a specific plan on how to evaluate members and future recommendations.
NOFO updates
1. Planning Grant/New Site - no updates provided
2. Planning Grant/Detention Pilot Program - no updated provided
3. Assessment - Erica Hughes has started writing the funding notice.
Outreach efforts: The Board discussed at length outreach efforts made in Kane County, Champaign County, Cook County, Lake County, Rock Island County, Sangamon County, and Vermilion County. Ms.Hughes reported that in conversations with sites about expanding to other populations has led to discussions about building CCBYS into the continuum of care for youth before Redeploy would serve them.
Data Work Group update: did not discuss
Adjourn
Motion: Judge George Timberlake motioned to adjourn; Rick Velasquez seconded the motion.
Decision: The meeting adjourned at 11:38.
Upcoming meetings/events: Executive Committee Meeting: Friday, January 17th, 2020; Full RIOB Meeting: Friday, February 21st, 2020