►
From YouTube: COVID-19: Justice Responses for Community Supervision
Description
This virtual meeting will provide an overview of the current statutory framework for community supervision and prison release that enables a rapid response to COVID-19 and highlight policies of concern to states during the pandemic. Attendees will also hear from practitioners about how policy is playing out in the justice system and have an opportunity to ask questions.
A
Good
morning,
good
afternoon,
depending
on
what
coast,
your
honor
berry
of
the
country,
thank
you
for
joining
us
for
the
final
meeting
in
our
series
on
justice
responses
to
cope
in
nineteen.
My
name
is
Allison
Lawrence
and
I'm
your
host.
Today,
we
will
be
exploring
community
supervision
strategies
during
the
pandemic,
how
practice
changed
and
what
the
research
says:
Amanda,
Essex
and
CSL
community
supervision
expert,
we'll
start
with
an
overview
of
recent
legislative
trends.
Kathy
waters
from
Arizona
and
Kelly
Mitchell
of
Minnesota
well
join
Amanda
for
a
discussion.
A
Full
bios
are
available
on
our
web
page
and
we've
reserved
some
time
at
the
end
for
questions.
I
would
like
to
thank
the
Pew
Charitable
Trusts
public
safety
performance
project
for
their
generous
support
of
this
meeting.
Amanda
next
slide
please
or
we
get
started
I'm
gonna
cover
just
a
couple
of
logistics.
Hearing
McGinnis
is
managing
our
controls.
We
have
everyone
on
mute
to
ensure
audio
quality
of
the
presenters.
I
encourage
you
to
join
me
in
taking
advantage
of
the
chat
box
function.
A
The
chat
box
may
be
located
on
the
right
side
of
your
screen
or
you
can
access
it
by
clicking.
The
word
bubble
symbol
in
the
navigation
bar
you
can
use
that
just
submit
questions
throughout
the
meeting.
I
will
also
be
dropping
in
a
couple
links
that
are
Faculty's
reference
in
the
chat
box
and
there's
a
resources
page
for
this
medium,
where
you
can
also
find
those
links
and
I've.
B
Coulson
good
morning
and
afternoon,
everyone
I'm
going
to
start
off
with
a
quick
overview
of
some
of
the
statistics
or
on
probation
and
parole,
as
well
as
some
of
the
recent
legislative
trends
in
Community
Supervision
policy.
So
you
see
on
the
screen
here:
4.5
million,
that's
the
number
of
people
who
are
under
community
supervision
at
the
end
of
2016.
B
According
to
the
Bureau
of
Justice
Statistics,
this
chart
comes
from
a
September
2018
report
from
the
Pew
Charitable
Trusts
public
safety
performance
project
developed
in
partnership
with
Arnold
Ventures
called
probation
and
parole
systems
marked
by
high-stakes,
missed
opportunities.
The
link
to
this
report
is
in
the
chat
box
and
on
the
resources
webpage.
This
chart
shows
the
rate
of
community
supervision
by
state
as
of
2016.
B
B
Just
last
month,
this
partnership
released
a
new
framework
to
improve
probation
and
parole.
This
framework
is
linked
in
the
chat
box
and
it
includes
seven
objectives
within
which
all
of
the
policy
recommendations
fall.
These
objectives
include
one
enacting
alternatives
to
arrest
incarceration
and
supervision,
to
implement
evidence-based
policies,
centered
on
risks
and
needs
three
adopt
shorter
supervision
sentences
and
focus
on
goals
and
incentives
for
established,
effective
and
appropriate
supervision
conditions,
five
develop
individualized
conditions
for
payment
of
legal
financial
obligations,
six
reduce
the
use
of
and
pathways
to
incarceration
and
seven
support
communities
for
vision
agencies.
B
B
Failing
a
drug
test.
Much
of
what
has
been
enacted
in
recent
years
has
focused
on
reducing
these
technical
violations
that
contribute
to
prison
admissions.
Well-Established
in
law
is
the
ultimate
authority
for
sentencing,
courts
and
parole
boards
to
make
decisions
on
disposition
of
supervision
violations.
Recent
changes
have
established
more
prescriptive
guidance,
but
they've
also
expanded
options
for
responding
to
violations
during
the
Kovach
19
pandemic.
B
One
of
the
more
pointed
policies
has
been
to
limit
the
use
of
incarceration
for
probation
and
parole
technical
violations.
As
shown
on
this
map.
At
least
31
states
have
limited
the
use
of
incarceration
as
a
response
to
technical
violations,
in
addition
to
short-term
jail
stays.
These
laws
have
created
specialized
facilities
for
violators
in
lieu
of
prison
and
capped
the
amount
of
time
behind
bars
based
on
the
number
of
violations,
for
example,
a
maximum
of
60
days
incarceration
for
a
first
violation
90
for
a
second
and
120
for
a
third.
B
The
incarceration
caps
have
evolved
in
many
states
into
a
full
code
section
on
what
are
called
graduated
sanctions
in
statute.
This
looks
like
a
framework
of
options
that
can
or
must
be
used
instead
of
formal
revocation
proceedings.
In
addition
to
defining
how
long
incarceration
can
last
other
sanctions
authorized
include
verbal
warnings,
community
service
day
reporting,
electronic
monitoring
and
participation
in
treatment.
On
this
second
map,
you
can
see
at
least
35
states
have
given
supervision
agencies,
in
addition
to
courts
of
parole
boards,
the
authority
to
order
graduated
sanctions
for
technical
violations.
B
Along
with
this
authorization,
legislators,
often
change
related
statutes
to
support
the
principles
of
swift,
certain
and
proportionate
responses,
for
example,
allowing
due
process
hearing
requirements
to
be
waived
in
order
to
speed
up
the
time
between
violation
and
disposition,
putting
in
requirements
that
offenders
be
notified
of
the
potential
for
sanctions
and
delineating
an
order
for
which
stations
should
be
used,
ensuring
that
they
are
gradually
more
restrictive
and
proportionate
to
the
violation.
Swift
certain
and
proportionate
successful
implementation
of
graduated
sanctions
relies
on
adherence
to
evidence-based
practices,
which
we
will
hear
more
about
from.
Kelly.
B
The
effective
responses
to
technical
violations
have
contributed
to
a
decrease
in
prison
admissions
and
an
increase
in
the
number
of
people
on
supervision.
So
the
logical
next
step
has
been
to
explore
the
amount
of
time
spent
on
community
supervision.
How
long
a
person
spends
on
probation
and
parole
is
determined
by
the
court-ordered
sentence,
as
well
as
any
additional
time
ordered
because
of
violations
or
unpaid
restitution?
B
The
ability
for
courts
to
extend
that
time
is
rooted
in
statute
that
exists
in
most
states,
allowing
the
sentencing
court
to
continue,
modify,
extend
or
discharge
a
term
of
probation
if
justice
is
served
by
that
action,
states
have
capped
a
length
of
probation
and
limited.
The
reasons
for
in
length
of
extensions
in
these
caps
vary
greatly
from
state
to
state.
B
States
are
also
looking
at
ways.
Probationers
and
parolees
can
earn
an
earlier
discharge
date.
This
third
map
shows
states
that
have
added
statutory
guidance
for
compliance
credits
or
scheduled
reviews.
Both
of
these
are
discharge.
Policies
can
and
do
happen
without
statutory
guidance,
but
the
trend
has
been
to
codify
compliance.
Credits
are
also
called
earned.
Discharge
credits
have
been
adopted
by
at
least
15
states,
and
they
function
very
much
like
prison.
Goodtime
credit
is
awarded
on
a
monthly
basis
for
compliance
with
the
terms
of
supervision.
B
Scheduled
reviews
are
in
place
in
at
least
11
states
and
statute
sets
out
a
timeline
for
when
a
review
should
occur
either
after
a
certain
amount
of
time
has
been
served
or
as
a
percentage
of
the
total
sentence
length.
Both
the
credits
and
review
can
result
a
probationer
being
successfully
discharged
from
supervision
or
transferred
to
administrative
supervision
status,
meaning
they
don't
have
to
meet
with
their
supervision
officer.
B
These
are
just
some
of
the
legislative
trends
that
we've
seen
in
community
supervision
and
policy
and
you'll
see
a
link
in
the
chat
box
for
NCS
ELLs,
new
community
supervision,
legislation,
database
or
tracking
significant
in
accidents,
and
so
at
this
point,
I'd
like
to
begin
the
discussion
with
our
great
panelists
Kelly
Mitchell
and
Kathy
waters.
They're
gonna
be
telling
us
about
how
some
of
these
trends
are
playing
out
during
covin.
As
a
reminder,
please
be
sure
to
put
any
questions
you
have
for
our
speakers
in
the
chat
box,
and
so
my
first
question.
B
I'm
gonna
ask
Kelly,
as
they're
just
highlighted,
legislators
have
been
quite
active
over
the
last
decade
with
probation
and
parole
supervision,
as
the
executive
director
of
the
Robina
Institute.
You've
been
involved
with
research
around
supervision,
particularly
when
it
comes
to
evidence-based
practices.
Can
you
talk
about
the
work
you're
doing
at
Robina
and
how
that
can
help
inform
legislators
as
they
look
at
shifts
in
community
supervision
during
coab
it
and
also
love
to
have
you
offer
a
little
bit
of
information
about
the
recently
released
policy
framework
from
you
and
Arnold
Ventures
sure.
C
Thanks
for
having
me,
I
really
I
really
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
talk
with
you
all
today
and
the
Robina
Institute.
Does
research
in
probation,
parole
and
sentencing
guidelines
so
I'm
going
to
talk
today
about
some
of
the
work
we've
done
in
the
probation
and
parole
realm.
You
know,
community
supervision
is
a
relatively
new
area
of
research
at
the
Robina
Institute
we
started
back
in
2015.
One
of
our
first
efforts
was
just
to
compare
probation
rates
in
the
u.s.
to
that
in
Europe.
You
know
we
already
knew
that
the
u.s.
C
was
exceptional
with
regard
to
its
prison
rates,
so
we
were
trying
to
establish
whether
we
fit
the
same
pattern.
When
you
looked
at
probation
rates,
we
compared
the
US
and
50
states
and
the
50
states
to
39
European
countries,
and
we
found
that
the
u.s.
rate
was
more
than
five
times
the
rate
of
European
countries
of
the
European
countries
combined
and
that
the
probation
rate
in
every
US
state
was
higher
than
all,
but
three
of
those
39
European
countries.
C
Following
that
we
started
taking
a
deeper
dive
into
how
privation
works.
The
current
trends
in
probation
and
parole
and
in
government
is
to
focus
on
evidence-based
practices
that
it.
That
means
focusing
your
time
and
resources
and
practices
that
have
been
proven
to
work
through
research,
and
so
the
purpose
of
the
research
in
this
area
that
we
do
is
just
to
figure
that
out
what
works
back
in
the
1970s
Robert
Martinson
published
an
infamous
report
in
which
he
reviewed
200
correctional
programs
and
found
that
they
had
very
little
effect
on
reducing
recidivism.
C
The
report
was
interpreted
as
meaning
that
nothing
worked,
but
what
he
was
really
saying
was
he
couldn't
tell
he
couldn't
tell
whether
the
issue
was
that
people
couldn't
be
rehabilitated.
He
couldn't
tell
if
the
problem
was
that
we
were
delivering
the
wrong
program
programming
or
if
we
were
delivering
the
right
programming
in
the
wrong
way.
C
So
that's
what
the
research
over
the
past
several
decades
has
been
focused
on
trying
to
ferret
out
evidence-based
practices
in
community
supervision
are
based
on
matching
the
right
intervention
with
the
right
people
at
the
right
time
and
in
the
right
amount.
Recently
Robina
partnered
with
the
Pew
Charitable
Trusts
and
Arnold
Ventures
to
research.
The
policies
and
practices
that
were
considered
for
inclusion
in
the
framework
that
frameworks
that's
worth
multiple
policies
that
States
and
supervision
agencies
could
interact,
get
an
act
to
improve
community
supervision
outcomes.
C
So,
as
we
work
through
this
pandemic,
the
research
from
that
framework,
the
research
and
the
framework
can
help
us
focus
in
on
what's
really
important
in
community
supervision
and
the
things
we
need
to
find.
So
those
are
the
things
we
need
to
find
a
replacement
for
like
a
new
way
of
doing
under
this
under
this
different
system
and
as
well
as
the
things
that
we
could
let
go
of
which
things
are
not
as
important
or
as
effective.
C
So
I'm
going
to
tell
you
just
a
couple
of
things
that
rose
to
the
top
in
terms
of
the
research
like
these
are
the
things
we
don't
question
too
much.
First
of
all,
one
of
the
most
effective
frameworks
for
community
supervision
is
the
risk
needs
responsive,
'ti
framework.
That
means
before
a
person's
supervision
starts,
the
probation
or
parole
department
does
assess
as
the
person's
wrists
and
need
risk
refers
to
the
risk
to
re.
C
Offends
people
who
are
high
risk
are
the
ones
you
can
most
benefit
from
interventions
and
monitoring,
and
these
are
the
people
that
we
should
spend
more
time
with
people
who
are
low
risk
on
the
other
hands.
Research
tells
us
that
if
we
over
supervise
those
people,
we
can
actually
make
them
worse,
we
can
actually
increase
their
propensity
to
commit
crime.
So
those
are
the
people
we
largely
want
to
leave
alone.
C
So,
as
we
think
about
the
pandemic,
supervision
agencies
need
support
and
help
to
find
ways
to
maintain
contact
with
the
people
who
are
high-risk
and
largely
leave
alone.
The
people
who
are
low
risk
so
risk
tells
us
who
we
should
be
supervising
in
and
where
we
should
be
putting
our
resources
needs
tell
us
what
that
supervision
should
look
like
needs
refer
to
criminogenic
needs
and
those
are
the
factors
that
lead
people
to
commit
crimes,
and
that
also
can
be
changed.
If
we
intervene,
for
example,
does
the
person
have
antisocial
thinking?
C
Do
they
have
a
substance
abuse
problem?
If
we
can
identify
those
needs,
we
can
identify
propria
propria
programming
to
address
those
issues
and
reduce
their
risk
of
reoffending.
So,
during
the
pandemic,
continuing
to
connect
people
to
appropriate
programming
is
really
important
and
before
I
leave.
This
really
brief.
Discussion
of
the
risk
needs
responsibility.
C
Framework
I
just
want
to
emphasize
that
this
only
works
if
the
supervision
agency
is
using
a
risk
assessment
tool
that
is
periodically
validated
on
their
supervision,
population
and
validation
just
means
that
we
actually
do
the
research
to
see
if
the
people
that
were
predicting
to
be
high-risk
are
tend
to
be
the
ones
that
are
actually
reoffending.
We
want
to
make
sure
it's
working
for
our
population.
C
Finally,
the
last
point
I
want
to
make
is
that
we
also
know
that
the
relationship
between
the
supervision
officer
and
the
person
on
supervision
is
critically
important
to
their
to
that
person's
success.
People
on
probation
and
parole
do
best
when
the
officer
serves
as
a
kind
of
coach
holding
them
accountable,
providing
firm
that
fair
direction,
but
also
allowing
them
to
have
some
input
and
agency
in
the
process.
Every
interaction
between
the
officer
and
the
person
on
probation
or
parole
can
color
that
person's
chances
of
success
in
supervision.
B
Kelly
and
so
Kathy,
we
heard
her
mention
a
couple
times:
some
supervision
agencies
and
as
a
division
director
of
the
adult
probation
services,
division
you're
overseeing
the
boots
on
the
ground
for
supervision
of
probationers
in
Arizona.
Can
you
please
share
some
background
on
the
office?
You
oversee
tell
us
a
little
bit
about
the
probation
system
in
the
state,
describe
the
major
actions
you've
taken
to
respond
to
the
pandemic
and
why
you've
taken
those
steps.
Okay,
thanks.
D
Amanda
a
lot
of
what
what
Kelly
said,
really
kind
of
leads
into
something.
Just
give
you
a
little
bit
of
history,
I've
actually
been
in
Arizona
as
the
state
director
of
adult
probation
for
the
past
19
and
a
half
years,
and
probably
within
the
first
year,
we
began
the
work
that
that
Kelly
talked
about.
But
first
let
me
tell
you
probation
in
Arizona
is
under
the
Supreme
Court.
We
we
have
a
unified
court
system
and
so
I'm
the
I'm.
D
Basically,
the
state
director
that
oversees
the
adult
probation
departments
in
the
15
counties,
there's
one
Superior
Court,
but
there's
a
Superior
Court
in
the
county
of,
say,
America,
apena
and
so
there's
chief
probation
officers
in
all
15
counties
that
actually
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
presiding
judge.
So
it's
a
little
different
than
in
some
systems.
Some
systems
are
Community
Corrections,
our
probation
and
parole,
combined
under
the
executive
branch,
but
in
Arizona
probation
is
under
the
court.
D
D
It
had
a
good
system
when
I
got
here
and
I
would
like
to
think
19
and
a
half
years
later,
we're
kind
of
seen
as
a
model
because
of
some
of
the
outcomes
that
we've
had
when
I
like
I
said:
Kelly
talked
about
a
risk
assessment
when
you
really
start
working
towards
evidence-based
practice
and
when
I
got
here,
we
were
really
it
was
fairly
new
in
the
country.
We
knew
that
the
eight
principles
of
evidence-based
practice
was
out
there
as
a
guide
for
us.
So
this
is
in
2001.
D
In
about
2003,
we
embarked
on
a
new
third
generation
risk
assessment.
If
you
will,
it
was,
it
was
in
our
code
of
judicial
administration.
That
said,
there
would
be
a
standardized
risk
assessment
used
in
all
15
counties,
so
that
was
to
my
advantage,
but
it
was
that
we
had
to
decide
what
risk
assessment
and,
as
kelly
said,
it
had
to
be
validated
for
the
entire
state
and
so
back
in
the
day,
data
was
not
as
as
well,
you
know
was
not
as
readily
available.
D
We
didn't
have
automated
systems,
and
so
we
basically
went
out
to
every
County
and
gathered
the
data
and
sent
it
to
the
researcher
to
have
it
validated
was
the
offender
screening
tool
that
we
use
really
validated
for
the
state
of
Arizona
to
be
you
statewide?
It
came
back,
it
was,
and
we
then,
at
that
point
started
implementing
it.
You
know
what
I
would
say
about
evidence-based
practice.
That
is
that
it
does.
It
does
base
it
on
risks
needs
as
kelly
said,
but
it's
not
a
one-and-done.
D
We've
spent
endless
hours
and
lots
of
time
in
the
commitment
to
stay
true
to
the
fidelity
of
our
risk
assessment.
What
the
research
says
is
that
it
should
be
revalidated
about
every
five
to
seven
years.
Is
it
still
working
for
you?
Well,
I
can
tell
you
that
we
just
last
year
finished
our
third
validated
validation
of
the
risk
assessment
for
the
state.
Some
of
our
outcomes
were
very
good.
We
knew
that
we
had
strong
fidelity
among
the
officers.
D
This
third
validation,
we
were
going
on
our
revalidation
tour,
if
you
will,
and
going
county
by
county
to
train
on
risk
needs
what
the
research
said
about
our
assessment:
how
to
use
the
assessment
in
regards
to
high
medium
and
low
risk.
How
that
impacted?
Our
policy,
how
that
played
into
as
Kelly
talked
about
the
the
risk
in
the
needs?
D
More
importantly,
how
the
needs
feed
into
the
responsive,
'ti
in
the
case
plan
developed
with
the
officer
in
the
in
the
the
probationer
and
as
Kelly,
also
said,
I
liked
it
that
she
said
you
know
more
of
a
coach.
We've
spent
a
lot
of
time,
giving
officers
the
skills
to
really
coach
and
look
at
the
risk
and
needs,
and
writing
that
case
plan
that
really
what
we're
about
is
reducing
risk
and
so
the
case
plan
really
should
drive
how
the
supervision
happens.
D
There's
can
additions
of
probation,
but
the
conditions
can
sometimes
be
prohibitive
or
counter
to
what
the
needs
are
of
the
probationer.
So
we
tend
to
focus
more
on
within
those
conditions.
What
is
it
that
the
that
the
offender
needs
the
pandemic
caused
us?
We
were
about
halfway
through
our
training.
It
caused
us
to
just
fight
prior
to
our
stay
in
home
order.
My
staff
and
I
went
into
a
recording
studio
and
we
did
audio
of
our
presentations
and
linked
those
to
our
powerpoints.
So
half
the
county
got
the
live
presentations.
D
What
it
also
did
was
we
just
looked
at
alternative
methods
of
meeting
all
of
our
standards.
We,
you
know
it
was
not.
It
was
not
business
as
usual,
but
Public
Safety
was
first
the
health
of
arm,
not
only
our
probationers,
but
our
officers
came
into
play.
We
allowed
and
we
had
already
put
into
our
policy
about
a
year
or
more
ago
that
we
allowed
remote
access
reporting.
So
that
meant
they
could
use
some
sort
of
video
type.
D
So
that
allowed
officers
to
use
skype
facetime
they
would
do
still
do
home
visits,
but
they
would
text
the
individual
I'm
at
your
front
door.
I'm
in
your
front
yard.
Please
come
outside
and
you
know
they
would
do
their
face-to-face
contact
and
home
visit
that
way.
So
those
were
some
of
the
ways
that
we
adjusted,
but
we
really
didn't
stop
doing
supervision,
but
many
years
ago
we
really
by
our
code
of
judicial
administration.
We
scripted
our
policy
to
tell
officers.
This
is
how
you
supervise
minimum.
This
is
how
you
supervise
medium.
D
This
is
how
you
supervise
high-risk,
and
by
doing
that,
we
didn't,
as
Kelly
said,
pay
attention
holding
lower
risk.
People
accountable,
is
much
easier
and
doesn't
take
a
lot
of
resources
and
officer
time
as
those
we
really
needed
to
focus
on
who
were
higher
risk
because
of
higher
needs.
So
you
know,
if
you,
if
you
base
it
somewhat,
I,
always
compare
this
to
a
medical
model.
You
know,
if
you
go
to
the
doctor
and
you
have
a
headache
it
might
just
be.
D
B
Well,
thank
you
and
I
want
to
kind
of
use
something.
You
just
said
here
image
the
importance
of
the
health
of
the
officers
and
probationers,
and
then
you
also
meant
you're
still
during
the
community
supervision.
Individuals
in
our
communities
is
that
the
forefront
of
everyone's
minds
right
now,
Public
Safety,
is
a
cornerstone
of
community
supervision.
So
this
question
is
maybe,
for
both
of
you:
can
you
talk
about
how
these
two
goals
of
public
health
and
public
safety
either
work
together
or
compete
against
each
other.
C
I
actually
want
to
tell
you
about
some
research
that
we
just
put
out.
I
actually
recently
participated
in
some
research
with
three
other
professors
here
at
the
University
of
Minnesota.
It's
back
to
your
Tyler
Winkleman,
dr.,
rebecca
schaeffer
and
sociology
professor
Michele
Phelps,
and
we
were
studying
the
prevalence
of
health
conditions
among
people
on
probation
and
parole.
I
think
it's
probably
common
knowledge
that
people
who
spend
a
lot
of
this
art-
you
know
art
art,
spent
a
significant
term
in
prison.
Genta
have
four
health
outcomes
than
people
than
the
general
population.
C
What
we
were
trying
to
look
at
is
well.
How
does
that
compare
for
people
on
probation
and
parole?
Do
they
have
the
same
health
as
everybody
else,
because
they're
not
spending
that
time
in
prison
or
is
it
different?
And
so
we
actually
look?
We
actually
did
some
research
on
that
question
and
we
found
a
couple
of
really
interesting
things.
One
is
that
you
know.
Obviously
the
population
on
probation
and
parole
runs
a
bit
younger
than
her
general
population,
so
you'd
kind
of
expect
their
health
to
be
better.
C
But
the
reality
is
that
for
people
on
probation
and
parole-
and
this
is
from
a
nationwide
sample
there-
they
actually
experienced
that
either
the
same
or
worse,
levels
of
chronic
conditions,
including
asthma,
diabetes
and
a
hepatitis
C
things
like
that.
So
we
actually
have
a
population
here
whose
health
is
a
bit
worse
than
the
general
population,
so
I
think
for
me
that
means-
and
they
also
tend
to
have
less
access
to
health
care
when
you
kind
of
put
those
two
things
together.
C
So,
if
you
think
about
what
does
it
take
to
do
that
random
drug
testing,
you
know
you're
gonna
have
to
go
somewhere
to
leave
a
sample,
so
you
might
have
to
take
public
transportation.
You're.
Definitely
gonna
have
to
go
out
there
in
the
world,
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
shelter
at
home,
for
that
so
you're
putting
people
who
probably
have
to
have
a
worst
health
profile
at
risk.
Every
time
you're
asking
them
to
go
out
to
do
a
drug
test.
C
So
one
of
the
framework
you
know
pandemic
aside
actually
recommends
that
we
limit
drug
testing
to
people
who
actually
have
a
substance
abuse
problem
and
that
we
use
it
to
help
identify
those
times
when
people
are
struggling
and
need
some
help
with
treatment.
That's
the
that's
the
way
to
get
to
public
safety
right,
provide
those
interventions
so
that
people
can
get
the
help
that
they
need
and
and
to
reduce
their
risk
of
reoffending.
C
D
Yeah,
that's
why
I
will
build
on
that.
You
know
in
Arizona
we're
lucky
that
we
are
a
Medicaid
expansion
state
and
so
a
lot
of
our
probationers
are
what
we
call
access
eligible,
which
is
a
good
resource
for
us,
and
you
know
when
you
talk
about
risk
and
need.
We
also
talk
about
what
it
does
is
categorize,
and
if
you
look
at
the
history
of
individuals,
a
lot
of
them
come
from.
D
You
know
low
economic
background,
then
you
know
the
access
to
health
care
and
all
of
that
plays
in
just
just
through
generations
and
so
really
looking
at.
How
can
we
reduce
you
know
if
they're
not
healthy?
It's
not
it's,
not
just
mental
health.
It's
the
substance,
abuse
and
all
of
the
other
things
that
Kelly
talked
about.
D
We
asked
the
question
that
we
don't
score
it
because
there's
no
correlation
between
recidivism
in
that,
but
if
you
think,
if
someone
is,
is
going
to
be
required
to
do
community
work
service
or
you
know,
work
and
be
employed
and
be
successful.
Their
health
plays
a
big
part
of
that
and
and
their
family
health,
and
so
we
rely
on
our
access
and
we
actually
have
what
is
called
high
impact
centers,
and
these
are,
there
was
a
Medicaid
expansion
that
allowed
these
centers
that
actually
they
can
go
into
to
get
dental
work.
Physical
health.
D
B
Thank
you
for
that.
I
need
a
couple
of
times.
We've
heard
a
little
bit
examples,
but
the
policy
framework
is
to
establish
effective
and
appropriate
supervision
conditions,
some
conditions
that
are
imposed
on
individuals
like
in-person
check-ins,
with
their
supervision
officers,
treatment
and
skills
classes
that
generally
require
that
person-to-person
interaction
really
aren't
feasible
or
safe.
In
this
current
climate,
how
have
some
of
these
conditions
adapted
or
modified,
and
are
they
still
able
to
adhere
to
evidence-based
practices?.
D
Do
you
want
me
to
take
that
Kelly
yeah?
So
we
have?
Actually,
you
know
a
lot
of
the
research
and
data
and
I
think
when
you
start
moving
towards
the
direction
that
we
did
with
evidence-based
practice
practices.
It
really
launched
us
into
more
standardization.
We
have
standardized
conditions
of
probation
statewide.
So
as
we
look
at
those
conditions,
we're
able
to
do
that
on
a
statewide
basis
and
it's
actually
in
our
code
of
judicial
administration
or
in
our
policy.
So
we
have
really
touched
on.
D
Instead
that
our
Supreme
Court
would
do
what
the
research
says
and
she
actually
created
the
Center
for
evidence-based
sentencing.
So
what
we
actually
did
at
that
time
was
embed.
The
risk
needs
assessment
into
our
pre-sentence
report.
So
when
the
judges
get
the
pre-sentence
report,
they
can
take
a
look
at
that
and
instead
of
just
checking
the
boxes
of
everything
they
want
and
everything
they
want
people
to
do
or
everybody
gets
the
same
conditions.
They
can
actually
look
at
the
risk
assessment
and
order
that
individual
to
those
special
conditions
that
apply
to
reducing
the
risk.
D
That
is
given
to
them
in
the
wrists
knees
instrument.
So
that's
some
of
what
we've
done
ongoing
I
think
what
we've
had
to
do
during
the
pandemic
is
not
that
we
turn
a
blind
eye
to
conditions,
but
there's
what
we
call
technical
violations
and
then
there's
new
crimes.
You
know,
and
our
number
one
goal
is
public
safety.
If
you
reduce
risk,
you
reduce
reoffending,
and
so
you
know,
reporting
became
very
different.
D
D
Everyone
was
on
the
stay
at
home
order,
so
unless
they
were
leaving
to
go
to
work,
it
really
actually
enhanced
the
officers
ability
to
contact
them
where
they
were
so.
The
technical
violations
would
be
fair
to
report
or
perhaps
not
showing
up
for
a
UA.
Some
people
would
argue
that
a
dirty
UA
is
a
new
crime,
but
sometimes
it's
not
charged
that
way,
especially
if
they
have
an
addiction.
You
can
expect
someone
to
have
a
dirty
UA.
D
So
why
would
we
all
of
a
sudden
do
things
that
were
going
to
incarcerate
more
individuals,
especially
for
technical
violations?
The
only
time
that
we
really
would
issue
a
warrant
and
ask
that
the
person
be
incarcerated
would
have
been
for
a
new
crime
and
when
Public
Safety,
and
there
was
a
danger
to
the
public.
Regarding
that
that
doesn't
mean
that
we
turned
a
blind
eye
to
those
technical
violations
either.
We
just
reengaged
and
tried
to
work
through
them
to
try
to
bring
them
into
compliance
with
those
violations.
C
That's
that
you
know
that's
the
basic
stuff
like
maintain
contact
with
your
supervision
officer
right,
so
a
few
of
those
things
have
to
be
there,
but
then
really
like.
Take
the
rest
and
and
focus
those
on
the
individual
and
on
their
needs
and
try
to
limit
those
the
number
there
too.
So
so
it's
kind
of
a
it's
kind
of
a
twofer.
You
wanna,
you
want
to
make
sure
you
hit
those
standard
conditions
and
reduce
those
as
much
as
possible
and
also
make
that
connection
of
special
conditions
to
the
person's
needs.
You.
D
Know
what
I
might
add
there
Kelly?
Is
that
sometimes
you
know
more
is
not
better.
You
really
need
to
do
the
level
of
you
know
the
level
of
risk
with
that
individual
more
requirements,
but
sometimes
we
put
so
many
requirements
on
individuals,
there's
only
40
hours
and
a
week,
and
we
set
them
up
to
fail,
rather
than
setting
them
up
to
succeed
in
working
with
each
individual
about
what
what's
going
to
work
for
them
to
help
change
that
behavior
that
to
the
to
the
crime,
I.
B
A
D
Know
one
of
the
things
that
that
also
is
in
the
framework
that
we
looked
at
and
we're
still
ongoing,
working
on
that
as
well,
is
looking
at
the
ability
of
individuals
to
pay
and
building
that
in
and
have
a
standard
way
of
of
weighing.
You
know
what
what's
reasonable,
what
can
they
pay?
What
can't
they
pay
so
that's
kind
of
ongoing.
We
want
everyone
to
be
using
and
considering
the
ability
to
pay,
but
you
know
we
have
the
ability
that
would
be
seen
for
us
as
a
technical
violation
and
I
think
you
have
to
individualize.
D
What's
going
on
with
the
individual,
if
they're
not
working,
if
they're,
not
drawing
unemployment,
if
they're
aren't
you
know
what
what
can
they
do
and
they're
trying
to
survive
so
working
with
them,
we
do
have.
We
came
out
with
policy
after
our
supreme
court,
had
a
fair
justice
task
force
and
looked
at
reducing
fees
and
fines
across
all
boards.
I
mean
not
just
those
under
Superior
Court
supervision,
but
all
court
cases
that
are
we
imprisoning
people
or
you
know
it
should
be
the
ability
to
pay
for
any
fee
and
fine.
D
And
so
we
built
that
into
our
policy
that
individuals
cannot
be
revoked
to
prison
or
jail
because
of
because
of
fees
and
fines.
We
have
to
establish
an
inability
to
pay
so
that
that's
one
thing
that
we
did
incorporate
into
into
our
practices-
and
you
know
just
working
with
the
individuals
and
we
have
the
ability
to
extend
their
probation.
C
The
at
the
Robina
Institute,
we
actually
are
engaged
in
a
project
right
now
to
assess
the
additional
load
of
fines
and
fees
that
are
imposed
during
the
period
of
supervision
and
I.
Think
most
people
are
aware
that
when
a
person
is
convicted,
there's
often
a
fine
that
goes
along
with
that
conviction
and
there
might
be
court
costs
or
attorneys
fees
that
the
person
has
to
pay,
but
I
think
fewer
people
are
aware
that
the
fees
keep
adding
on
adding
up
when
you're
on
supervision.
C
A
lot
of
supervision
offices
have
to
charge
a
fee
to
people
for
their
services,
so
there's
a
supervision,
a
monthly
supervision
fee
that
people
will
pay,
and
sometimes
people
have
to
pay
for
that
drug
testing.
Sometimes
they'll
have
to
pay
co-pays
for
the
programming
that
they're
required
to
engage
in
it
really
like
there's
another
a
whole
another
variety,
another
box
to
open
when
you're
on
on
supervision.
So
so
it
yeah.
The
problem
is
a
little.
C
It
can
be
even
more
compounded
during
a
period
like
now
and
then
with
then,
if
you
sort
of
look
at
what
are
the
options,
if
you
can't
pay
those
fees,
you
know
some
states
still
revoke
people's
licenses
for
failure
to
pay.
So
I've
seen
a
trend
in
reversing
that
in
many
states,
and
one
thing
that
I
think
is
is
really
important.
To
think
about
here
is
well
actually
I
lost
my
thought
so
I
don't
know
what
I
thought
was
important,
but
what?
C
But
one
thing,
I
bet
that
I
was
actually
really
amazed
by
I
live
in
Minnesota
I
live
in
Ramsey,
County
Minnesota
and
during
the
pandemic,
Ramsey
County
actually
waived
all
their
fees
for
people
on
supervision
and
decided
that
they
would
stop
collecting
supervision
fees.
It
was
a
bold
move,
I
couldn't
believe
it,
but
it
was.
It
was
pretty
amazing
because
they
recognized
that
the
people
that
they
had
under
supervision
just
didn't
have
the
financial
means
to
do
that
and
their
goal
was
public
safety,
which
is
providing
services
and
interventions
to
people
on
community
supervision.
D
Know,
sorry,
no
good
right,
you
know
giving
the
court
you
know
if
there
are
things
that
can
be
waived,
I
mean
giving
them
the
opportunity
to
actually
advise.
You
know
an
inability
to
pay
and
what
can
be
waived
and
then
also
there
may
be
ways
that
they
can.
You
know
if
they've
been
involved
like
our
community
service
hours.
You
know
you
could
have
those
in
lulav
and
we've
calculated
a
price
that
they
could
do
some
more
community
service
and
work
off
those
fees
and
fines.
A
C
That's
a
tougher
one
right
and
because
the
way
that
most
most
supervision
is
structured,
that
we
spend
our
time
with
people
who
are
high
risk
and
low
risk
kinda
needs
is
a
bit
of
a
different
I.
Don't
think
we
have
the
perfect
answer
on
that
group,
yet
I'm
actually
gonna
kick
it
over
to
Kathy
to
see
if
there's
anything
that
you
do
specifically
in
your
jurisdiction
for
those
folks,
yeah.
D
We
actually
have
it
in
our
policy
that
if
they
score
within
a
certain
domain
of
the
risk
assessment,
that's
pretty
high,
but
overall
they
still
come
out
as
low-risk.
Then
we
still
have
to
address
those
issues.
So
the
case
plan
still
has
to
work
with
that
individual.
You
may
not
have
to
have
as
many
contacts
with
individual
the
contact
doesn't
unless
you're
assisting
them
with
the
need.
That's
where
the
contact
should
focus
on
he's
really
working
on
that
need.
C
And
they're,
really
that
one
of
the
things
that's
really
key
with
people
who
are
low
risk
is
they're,
gonna
tend
to
be
people
who
have
the
social
supports,
took
place
and
employment,
but
that
Kathy
talked
about
earlier.
So
you
want
to
you
know
if
you're
gonna
provide
that
service,
you
want
to
do
it
in
a
way
that
doesn't
interrupt
those
others,
the
good
things
that
that
person
already
has
going.
That's
that's
really
the
key
there.
A
A
D
You
want
me
to
take
that
Kelly,
yep
I
would
say
data
data
data
in
in
the
early
days,
when
I
was
trying,
you
can
imagine
trying
to
change
a
culture
and,
and
some
of
the
the
culture
you
know
was
very
punitive
and
so
trying
to
change
that
within
a
court
system
or
within
any
system.
It
takes
a
lot
of
training
and
it
wasn't
until
I
could
get
the
day
that
you
know
when
I
came
in
and
and
and
said,
we
want
to
supervise
these
people
this
way
and
and
if
they're
low
risk.
D
We
really
don't
want
to
do
a
lot
with
them.
We
can
imagine
how
that
went
over.
So
you
know
everybody
there's
conditions
of
the
court.
You
know
there's
supervision,
we
have
to
be
this,
so
it
was
when
I
can
show,
through
the
risk
assessment,
how
many
people
we
really
were
kind
of
upside
down,
showing
that
we
were
over
supervising
people.
D
Well
then,
we
saw
we
did
a
violation
study
and
we
saw
that
43
percent
of
the
people
going
into
the
Department
of
Corrections
were
coming
from
us
on
probation
and,
of
course,
the
chief
probation
officers
were
pretty
defensive
and
said
that
has
to
be
new
crimes
it
has
to
be.
We
wouldn't
be
doing
that
when
we
really
drilled
deeper
into
the
data.
D
Eighty
percent
of
that
forty
three
percent
were
technical
violations,
and
so
what
I
would
say
is
we
had
to
change
our
behavior
before
we
can
change
other
behavior,
so
getting
everybody
categorized
and
assessed
properly
and
then
the
supervision
strategies
that
followed?
You
know,
and
I
can
say
you
know
you
can
look
at
our
data
over
time-
that
the
Council
of
state
governments
and
others
and
our
our
safe
communities
report.
You
know
we
actually
flatlined
the
prison
population
in
two
or
three
years,
so
that
was
significant
and
but
to
Allison's
point.
D
We
had
to
do
lots
of
training.
We
had
to
change,
train
OTT,
just
probation
officers.
We
have
to
train
the
judges,
we
did
multiple
trainings
for
judges,
we
engaged
the
defense
bar
and
we
engaged
the
prosecutors
and
the
Chief,
Justice
and
I
actually
went,
and
you
know
we
spoke
to
the
legislature
and
they
loved
it
when
they
saw
our
outcomes,
because
we
know
what
corrections
budgets
can
be,
and
we
were,
you
know,
reducing
the
prison
population
and
we
played
a
part
in
that.
That
was
quite
significant.
I.
C
Think
to
not
underscore
the
importance
of
that
relationship
with
the
bench
that
Kathy
just
described
I
mean
she's,
lucky
she's
in
the
judicial
branch
already,
so
they
have
a
natural
relationship.
But
if
there's
not
a
good
exchange
of
information
between
the
bench
and
the
probation
department,
then
the
sort
that
sentence
and
the
conditions
that
are
imposed
by
the
bench
can
actually
be
run
counter
to
what
we
need
to
do
to
effectively
supervise
people.
C
A
D
So
they
can
really
do
their
work
and
not
put
themselves
at
risk,
but
we
also
learned
that
our
access
for
our
treatment
providers
allowed
there
to
be
teleservices
that
our
providers
were
reluctant
to
do
that.
But
this
has
really
now
helped
them.
They
know
now
they
have
to
provide,
tell
account
sling
until
services,
just
as
all
of
us.
If
we
went
to
our
doctor,
you
know
you
would
have
a
Skype
call
with
your
doctor
or
doctor
on
call,
so
I
think
that
technology
will
will
be
ongoing.
D
I
think
this
whole
pandemic
has
taught
the
last
thing
that
I
know
we
tried
to
get
away
from
fortress
supervision,
of
making
it
harder
on
the
probationers
to
report
in
and
get
officer
out
into
the
field
and
going
to
where
they
are
doing
those
remote
connections.
This
has
helped
us
go
back
to
that
in
the
probationers.
I
think
appreciate
it
that
they're
being
checked
on.
How
are
you
doing
it's
not
just
about
the
compliance,
but
how
are
you
health-wise
how's,
your
family?
Are
you
doing?
B
On
that
note,
I
do
have
a
couple
of
final
question
for
Egypt
to
get
some
final
thoughts
before
we
finish
Kathy.
This
has
really
kind
of
been
the
undercurrent
of
a
lot
of
what
you've
said,
but
you've
been
undergoing
reform
work
in
Arizona.
What
are
some
of
the
recommendations
coming
out
of
those
efforts
that
could
potentially
be
moved
forward
because
of
covet
19.
D
Well,
we've
been
able
to
have
work
group
meetings,
nothing
has
stopped
so
we've
had
team
meetings
and
ongoing
I
have
a
judge,
who's.
Helping
me
work
with
the
conditions
of
probation
to
really
finalize
those,
even
though
we've
made
them
evidence-based
and
reduced
them
in
the
past.
We
really
want
to
take
another
look
at
them
again,
but
it's
hard
to
do
that
without
the
judges,
understanding
why
we
want
to
do
that
so
I
think
that's.
Our
first
is
to
do
some
training
with
the
judges
and
then
engage
them
in
that
work.
D
D
How
can
we
improve
our
outcomes
on
on
the
probation
and
then,
lastly,
we're
looking
at
more
standardization
of
early
termination
of
probation
one
of
the
things
that
we
did
back
and
justice
McGregor
when
it
was
the
the
budget
issues
in
2000
about
nine
or
ten
was
that
we
she
asked
the
court
to
take
a
look
at
cases
in
those
individuals
that
could
be
early
term
and
moved
off.
The
supervision
safely
should
do
so.
Those
who
are
on
intensive
supervision
take
a
look
at
those
move,
those
into
more
of
a
standard
supervision.
D
B
C
That
you
know
I've
heard
that
I've
heard
anecdotally
what
some,
what
some
community
supervision
departments
are
doing
it
so
responds
to
to
the
pandemic,
and
one
thing
that
I
thought
was
interesting
was
you
know
people
who
were
serving
jail
terms
and
I?
Think
Kathy
mentioned
this
in
Arizona
too,
they
were
serving
jail
terms,
but
they
were
leaving
the
jail
every
day
to
go
to
work
and
those
people
were
released
and
put
on
home
either
electronic
monitoring
or
home
confinement
and
I
think
that
that's
making
making
folks
reconsider
like
do.
C
C
We
had
a
couple
of
counties
that
really
had
sort
of
a
trigger
response
to
violations
and
30
days
in
jail
was
a
was
a
real
common
sanction
and
they
can't
do
that
now
right,
so
they've
they've
agreed
not
to
do
that
now
and
I've
heard
you
know
even
from
prosecutors.
You
know
I,
don't
even
know
why
we
ever
did
30
days
to
begin
with.
You
know,
maybe
we
maybe
we
know
need
that
at
all
the
next
time
around
or
maybe
we
think
of
something
less
than
five
days.
C
You
know
something:
that's
not
going
to
interfere
with
that
person's
employment
and
housing
situation,
so
those
are
really
encouraging.
Those
are
really
encouraging
signs
and
I
think
that
what
it
all
boils
down
to
is
that
the
pandemic
has
made
us
all
realize
that
less
is
more
and
I.
Think
all
of
us
in
our
personal
lives
have
had
some
sort
of
shed
the
things
that
that
aren't
important
so
that
we
can
get
the
things
done.
C
That
really
have
to
be
done,
because
it's
a
little
bit
harder
to
do
it
in
the
situation
that
we're
in
right
now,
right
and
community
supervision
really
isn't
any
different.
Like
it's
a
great
opportunity
to
think
about
which
things
do
we
really
need
to
keep
doing
the
way
we've
done
the
way
we've
done
them
before,
because
we've
always
done
them
that
way
and
which
things
could
we
sort
of,
let
go
of
and
try
in
a
different
way
or
keep
the
different
way.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
so
much
Kathy.
Thank
you.
So
much
Kelly
great
discussion
today,
I'd
also
like
to
give
a
special
thank
you
to
Amanda,
as
well
as
the
staff
of
the
Pew
Charitable
Trusts
they've
all
helped
us
to
design
and
produce
the
entire
series
of
these
virtual
meetings,
and
if
you
want
to
check
out
previous
virtual
means
that
we've
done
the
recordings
are
up
and
I've
stuck
the
links
in
the
chat
box,
we
hope
you've
enjoyed
this.