1 / 58

CDCSOM Evolution

The Development of a Regional Model for Sex Offender Management Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management Thursday, May 5, 2005 Presenters: Richard Hamill, Ph.D. Project Manager Noel C. Thomas, M.A. Project Coordinator Dawne Amsler-Nunziato, M.A. Research Coordinator.

coyne
Download Presentation

CDCSOM Evolution

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Development of a Regional Model for Sex Offender ManagementCapital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management Thursday, May 5, 2005Presenters:Richard Hamill, Ph.D. Project ManagerNoel C. Thomas, M.A. Project CoordinatorDawne Amsler-Nunziato, M.A. Research Coordinator

  2. CDCSOM Evolution

  3. CDCSOM Project • History: • 1986 New York State Alliance of Sex Offender Service Providers established • 1988 Alliance (NYSASOSP) incorporated • 1995 Established New York State chapter of ATSA 1999 Established Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management • 2000 Awarded Planning Grant from CSOM • 2002 Awarded CSOM Implementation Grant • 2002 Awarded OCFS grant to study juveniles and children who act out sexually

  4. Problems Identified by Alliance / NYSATSA Members 1. Law enforcement resources inconsistent; some investigations ineffective 2. Prosecutions inconsistent, sometimes ineffective 3. Courts sentencing without benefit of risk assessment 4. Treatment resources sometimes not available 5. Some treatment not being provided according to ATSA Practice Standards and Guidelines 6. Some sex offenders not being referred for treatment 7. Community supervision of sex offenders inconsistent, not adhering to best practice 8. Some interventions not in keeping with best interests of the victims

  5. Our Goal • To enhance the investigation, prosecution, treatment and community supervision of sex offenders, using a victim – centered approach

  6. Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management Underlying beliefs: Benefits of Regional Model • Counties often lack adequate resources to make county-by-county approach viable • States often too big to deliver services effectively to all counties • By clustering counties and sharing resources, we can improve quality and quantity of services

  7. Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management Beliefs about the Multidisciplinary Approach To be effective, team must involve: Law enforcement Prosecutors Defense attorneys Law guardians Community Supervision/Corrections Mental health professionals Victim advocates

  8. Capital District Coalition for Sex Offender Management Underlying Beliefs • An effective teamshould also include: Child Protective Services investigators Judiciary, in an advisory role School personnel (if project includes juveniles) Representatives of the County Executives State offices: Office of Mental Health Office of Children and Family Services Office of Mental Retardation Office of Court Administration Division of Criminal Justice Services State Police

  9. The Five County CDCSOM Catchment Area Population in 2003 (U.S. Census) New York State 19,190,115 Albany County 297,845 Columbia County 63,405 Rensselaer County 154,007 Saratoga County 209,818 Schenectady County 147,289 CDCSOM Catchment 872,364

  10. The Five County CDCSOM Catchment Area Median Household Income New York State $43,393 Albany County $42,939 Columbia County $41,915 Rensselaer County $42,905 Saratoga County $49,460 Schenectady County $41,739 (U.S. Census Bureau Figures 1999)

  11. The Five County CDCSOM Catchment Area Population Density Sq. Miles Persons per Sq. mile New York State 47,214 401.9 Albany County 523 562.7 Columbia County 636 99.2 Rensselaer County 654 233.3 Saratoga County 812 247.1 Schenectady County 206 711.1 CDCSOM Catchment 2,831

  12. Research to Determine the Nature and Scope of Problems THREE STUDIES 1. System Mapping – Interviews of key personnel to gather impressions about what works, and nature of problems 2. Pipeline analysis – Collection of data on all sex offense cases in one year, from investigation, prosecution, sentencing, supervision and treatment 3. Snapshot analysis – Census of status of all sex offenders on a given day

  13. Findings from System Mapping Interviews 1. Created flow charts for each county 2. Gathered anecdotal data regarding problems in the various phases of case management 3. Generated hypotheses about problems to be tested in pipeline and snapshot analyses 4. Started compilation of list of resources 5. Gathered suggestions for improvements

  14. Examples of Findings from Pipeline Analysis • Sample of 74 “registerable” sex offense cases which were opened in 1999. Data gathered from District Attorney files. • Findings: Charged offenses and convictions 71% charged with only one offense Most commonly charged offenses: • Sexual Abuse I (forcible, or victim < 11) 28% • Rape III (non-forced, victim 14-16) 10% • Sodomy III (non-forced, victim 14-16) 10% • Rape I (forcible, or victim < 11) 09% • Endangering the Welfare of a Child 21%

  15. Examples of Findings from Pipeline Analysis • Distribution of sentences: County Jail (1 year or less) 28% State prison – short (1-3 years) 26% State prison – medium (3-10 years) 20% State prison – long (11-82 years) 10% Community supervision (probation) 35% • Latency between arrest and conviction: 0 to 6 months 49% 6 to12 months 39% Longer than 12 months 12% • Pre-Sentence Report completed 72% • Specialized sex offender eval 23% • Viewing time measures 00% • Polygraph examination 00%

  16. Examples of Findings from Pipeline Analysis • Sex Offender treatment prior to offense 12.3% • Sex offender treatment for principal offense 13.5% • Diagnosis of mental retardation 02.7% • Diagnosis of major mental illness 09.5% • Psychopathy assessment performed 00.0% • History of substance abuse 29.7% • Treatment for substance abuse 10.8% • History of alcohol abuse/ dependence 25.7% • Treatment for alcohol abuse / dependence 12.2%

  17. Examples of Findings from Snapshot Analysis Sample: 144 adult sex offenders (96 Prob / 48 Parole) Ages: 60% of probationers were < 35 years old 60% of parolees were between 36 – 45 Education: More than one third (36%) did not complete HS Vocational: 57.3% considered “unskilled laborers” 23.0% considered “semi-skilled workers” Current job: 20.8% on parole were unemployed 31.3% on probation were unemployed Criminal Hx 19% had prior sex offense conviction 19% had min. one prior violent conviction 52% had prior nonviolent conviction

  18. CDCSOM Implementation

  19. CDCSOM Project Goals (2003 - 2005) • Promote client-centered approaches & victim advocacy • Increase the use of pre-sentence specialized sex offender evaluations • Increase the use of polygraph evaluations • Design a jail-based offender treatment program • Provide opportunities for professional training through clinical and technical consultation

  20. CDCSOM Project Goals (2003 - 2005) Continued • Provide the judiciary with an understanding of the comprehensive approach to sex offender management • Inform and educate the community about the comprehensive approach to sex offender management • Promote adherence to ATSA Standards and Guidelines

  21. Committees • Jail-Based Treatment Committee • Goal 3. Design a jail-based treatment program. • Evaluation Committee • Goal 1. Pre-sentence specialized sex offender evaluations. • Goal 5. Increase use of viewing time measures. • Vocational Committee • Goal 7. Vocational counseling.

  22. Committees (continued) • Supervision and Treatment Committee • Goal 4. Increase the use of polygraph evaluations. • Goal 6. Treatment. • Goal 8. Professional training; clinical and technical consultation. • Continuation Committee • Goal 12. A plan for continuation of CDCSOM beyond the grant period. • Goal 13. Disseminate information about the project beyond the five county areas.

  23. Committees (continued) • Training and Community Education Committee • Goal 2. Judicial training. • Goal 11. Community education. • Victim Advocacy Committee • Goal 9. Meetings with case review • Goal 10. Promote victim-centered approaches and victim advocacy.

  24. For Example: • Training and Community Education Committee • Inform and educate the community about the comprehensive approach to sex offender management. • April 2004 - (Training) A Comprehensive Approach to Managing Adult and Juvenile Sex Offenders in the Community: A Workshop for Practitioners and Policymakers (attendance over 400 participants) • May 2004 - (Training) Judicial Training • Spring 2005 - (Training) Town and Village Justices in our 5 county catchment area

  25. Victim Advocacy Committee • Promotes sensitivity to the victims’ concerns • Ensures no further harm to the victims • Addresses the needs and safety of past, present and potential victims • Includes victim advocates and service providers in the collaborative process

  26. CDCSOM Research

  27. Research Plan • Designed to help committee meet its goals • Feedback and input from each committee member incorporated into plan • Committees kept on target via tasks on planning calendar

  28. Calendar

  29. CDCSOM’s April 2004 Conference Survey Results • 283 Completed questionnaires • Designed to learn about what each county’s thoughts and current practices with regards to sex offender management and treatment

  30. Jail Snapshot Survey • January 15th Snapshot Census of each of the Jails in the 5 County Catchment Area • Examined age, race, gender, sentenced or un-sentenced status, length of stay, criminal charges

  31. Jail Snapshot Survey Results

  32. Jail Snapshot Survey Results Sex Offenses Committed (6) Failure to Register (5) Rape 1st (2) Rape 2nd (5) Rape 3rd (9) Sexual Abuse 1st (2) Sexual Abuse 2nd (1) Sexual Abuse 3rd (1) Sexual Abuse: Forcible Contact (1) Aggravated Sexual Abuse 1st (1) Aggravated Sexual Abuse 2nd (2) Attempted Sodomy 1st (7) Sodomy 1st (1) Sodomy 2nd (2) Sexual Misconduct (2) Criminal Sexual Act (3) Criminal Sexual Act 1st (1) Sexual Conduct Against a Child, 1st (1) Sexual Conduct Against a Child, 2nd (1) Course of Sexual Contact Against a Child (2) Attempted Sexual Misconduct against Child (1) Promoting Sexual Performance (1) Possession of a Sexual Performance by a Child

  33. Survey of Conference Participants Q: Do we need to institute (with necessary funding) an option for lifetime probation or parole for high risk sex offenders? A: 80% of responders said “Yes”

  34. Results of Conference Survey Q: Would it be beneficial for there to be a multidisciplinary team in your county to review sex offense cases? A: 93% of those responding said “Yes”

  35. Results of Conference Survey Q: To what extent do the relevant agencies in your county coordinate their services with respect to sex offenses/offenders? A: 20% little to not at all 49% Somewhat 31% A fair amount to extensively

  36. Results of Conference Survey The majority of respondents would like to see the polygraph used at the time of initial evaluation (74%), during the course of treatment (77%) and to check the compliance with safety plan and/or conditions of parole and probation (80%).

  37. Results of Conference Survey Q: To what degree do the relevant agencies in your county collaborate to improve the level of services and policies related to sex offenses? A: 27% Little to Not At All 46% Somewhat 28% A Fair Amount to Extensively

  38. Results of Conference Survey Q: What three things would you like to see done differently? Most Common Responses: Communication, Collaboration, Coordination, Cooperation

  39. For More Information, Please Visit our Website at www.cdcsom.com

  40. Computer Surveillance of Offenders

  41. Conditions Of Probation and Parole “ Submit to a search of your person, premise, residence, vehicle and area under his/her immediate control without prior notification as deemed appropriate by the Probation Department” GOOD- but not enough to search a computer “Submit to unannounced examination by the Probation Officer or designees of any all computer(s) and/or other electronic devices(s) to which he/she has access. This includes all data and/or images stored on hard disk drives, floppy diskettes, CD ROMS, optical disks, magnetic tape and/or any other storage media whether installed within a device or removable” BEST- needed to conduct computer search

  42. REQUIREMENTS TO CONDUCT FIELD SEARCH • Good condition of Probation/Parole • Consent of Owner • Search order granted by Court

  43. United States v. Sofsky, 287 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2002) “Is a Ban On Internet Access Fair Punishment?” If you were to ask Probation and Parole Officers they thought so. Prior to this decision offenders were given no computer access “Refrain from the use, possession, control of any/all computers or computer related materials unless approved by the Probation Department” The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in the case United States v. Sofsky, reversed part of child pornography conviction that prohibited computer and internet use without Probation Officer approval. The 2nd Circuit held that such a prohibition would unfairly encroach on the convict’s liberties.

  44. APPELLATE DECISION "We appreciate the Government's point that permitting Sofsky access to a computer and the Internet after serving his ten-year sentence can facilitate the continuation of his electronic receipt of child pornography, but we are more persuaded by the observation [in another case] that '[a]lthough a defendant might use the telephone to commit fraud, this would not justify a condition of probation that includes an absolute bar on the use of telephones.'" The court observed that "the same could be said of a prohibition on the use of the mails imposed on a defendant convicted of mail fraud." Thus, "a total ban on Internet access prevents use of e-mail, an increasingly widely used form of communication," and prevents other computer uses, such as conducting research, obtaining weather forecasts, or reading newspapers online.

  45. THE PENGUIN SLEUTH KIT (PSK) PSK is software used to search offender’s computers PSK is Linux. Linux is a free computer operating system for a large variety of architectures. Linux is said to be the future of data forensics.

  46. http://www.linux-forensics.com/forensics/pensleuth.html

  47. SUBGROUP OF SUPERVISON AND TREATMENT COMMITTEE FORMED Recognized need for the use of PSK. Probation and Parole officers needed this ability to search offenders computers. Looked to the NEW YORK STATE POLICE where this tool was used by a few Investigators in the field where a complete forensic examination was not practical or possible. Assistance was rendered and monthly meetings began in late 2003 to develop practical use for field investigations by Probation/Parole Officers. The committee is looking at best practice in multiple jurisdictions. A 2-day training was held in January 2005.

More Related