Elements of a High-functioning Pretrial Services Agency

1. Elements of a High-functioning Pretrial Services Agency Basics for organizational success

2. A Framework for Pretrial Justice Elements of an Effective Pretrial System and Agency https://nicic.gov/library/032831

3. Getting Bail Right.

4. Session Goals

8. Several jurisdictions have legislation authorizing or encouraging pretrial services agencies: • Kentucky • Federal courts • Washington, D.C. • Virginia • Illinois • Colorado • Hawaii • Nevada • Vermont • West Virginia

11. PSA’s mission is to assess, supervise, and provide services for defendants, and collaborate with the justice community, to assist the courts in making pretrial release decisions. We promote community safety and return to court while honoring the constitutional presumption of innocence. Pretrial Services Agency for the District of Columbia (2008) Promote pretrial justice and enhance community safety (current)

15. Assessing Pretrial Risk The Science of Pretrial Risk Assessment

16. Session Goals

19. What is “pretrial risk”? How likely are defendants to fail? How good are we at assessing risk? What factors are most predictive of pretrial risk? What’s the best method to assess pretrial risk? Quiz:

20. Defining Risk • A defendant’s likelihood of: • Missing a scheduled court date • Arrest on a separate criminal offense • “global” rearrests • rearrests on specific charge types

22. Assessing Risk First Generation: Unstructured professional/clinical judgment. Assessment relied on data gathered from the subject and official records and assessor’s personal experience and perceptions. Second Generation: Actuarial risk tools and factors replace judgment . These factors guide the assessor to a usually numeric scoring of risk. Risk factors generally are static, given the limitations of data collection and data systems. (Examples: Salient Factor Score (SFS) and Violent Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG)).

23. Assessing Risk Third Generation: RAIs incorporate dynamic risk factors and the concept of “criminogenic need,” allowing them to be more sensitive to change in risk levels over the life of supervision. These allow for limited overrides based on professional judgment. (Examples: LSI-SR) Fourth Generation: Explicit integration of risk/needs management into assessment. The goal extends beyond risk assessment to enhancing supervision and treatment. (Examples: Correctional Offender Management Profiling For Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS), Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS) and Wisconsin Risk and Needs Tool (WRN).

24. Assessing Risk The consensus from the behavioral science, economic, and criminal justice fields is that actuarial risk assessment is the superior method. Adjusted actuarial assessments—where practitioners have limited and well defined rules to override RAI results—is the preferred actuarial risk assessment technique.

26. Court PSA • Virginia (VPRAI Revised) • Federal Court (FRAI) • Ohio (ORAS/PAT) • Colorado (CPAT) • Florida RAI • Alaska • Nevada (NPR) • Locally-validated assessments • Washington, DC • Allegheny County, PA • Salt Lake, UT What’s Out There?

29. RAIs: The Results

30. RAIs: The Results

31. RAIs: The Results

32. RAIs: The Results

35. Appearance Rate=98% Safety Rate= 95%

37. Cautions RAIs show the “group” to which you belong, not your individual risk level The definition of “risk” is relative and not consistent in the research Separate assessments are the better practice, but factors that predict FTA also tend to predict rearrest well RAIs should not be the final say on release/detention

38. Issues RAIs and Pretrial Interviews Locally validated vs. publicly available RAIs Supervision to match risk factors and levels When needs play a role Inter-rater Reliability and Quality Assurance Staff Overrides

39. Recap Risk is a defendant’s likelihood to miss a scheduled court date or to be arrested on a separate criminal offense pretrial. The procedure that best predicts risk is an adjusted actuarial risk assessment. There are several “public domain” pretrial risk assessments available. Most defendants present a low to moderate pretrial risk. This should be reflected in an agency’s recommendations and a court’s release decisions. Remember your Cautions.

41. Using Recommendations to Promote Pretrial Success Goals and Best Practices

44. Session Goals

45. Recommendations Recommendations are the pretrial services agency’s suggested strategy to promote court appearance and public safety. Individualized to the defendant’s assessed risk level and other aggravating or mitigating factors found during the pretrial investigation. Outline the least restrictive intervention needed to assure court appearance and community safety

46. Recommendations (Recommendations) made to the judicial officer should link assessments of the risk of flight and of public safety to appropriate release options designed to respond to the specific risk and supervision needs identified. Suggested release options should be…the least restrictive conditions necessary to assure the defendant’s appearance for scheduled court events and protect the safety of the community and individual persons. NAPSA Release Standard 3.4(b)

49. It Starts with “Risk”

50. Appearance Rate=98% Safety Rate= 95%