2.

(ACTION) Review and possible approval of minutes of August 30, 2006

The minutes were approved as written.

(public comments)

There were none.

 3.

Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Program Committee of the Juvenile Probation Commission

 There were none.

 4.

(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Look at the CMS system and what kind of evaluation needs to be set up for CBO contracts.

The Chief said that Lonnie Holmes was out of town so could not speak to how the CMS system works.  He said that he understands that the CMS system will be able to help out in the evaluation process.  It will be able to provide data on client capacity and usage, and help with billing processes.  Oversight of the contract work still rests with L. Holmes.  They plan to hold quarterly meetings with the contractors to review progress/problems.  This aside, the evaluation would want to establish how well the contractors did in achieving their targeted work goals and outcomes.  The cost of doing this by an independent party has not been budgeted for.  He hopes that one evaluation process that MOCJ will be following can be used for some of the Dept’s contracts also.

One target that will be looked at is the recidivism rate of youth served.

He reported that there were only some contracts completed, for which work plans were provided to the Commission Secretary for distribution to the Committee members.  He said there were still 6 that needed completion (signatures, etc.)

He mentioned a report he was reading that talked about measuring program effectiveness according to 3 criteria: public safety, competency development, and victim satisfaction (elements of restorative justice). He will make this document available to the Commission.  He said that they have already created such an exit form for all POs to complete on youth that are leaving the system, and that info can be entered into the database and tabulated later. This can be extended to CBO contracts.

Comm Beijen asked if there was an absolute need for a 3^rd party evaluator.  The Chief asked the Commission Secretary what his opinion of the previous evaluation tool was. He commented that the PrIDE “program” was useless as an instrument that could tell if provider services were effective for youth served, or if youth were referred to appropriate services per their actual needs.

The Chief asked the Commission to be more specific as to what it is looking for with regards to evaluations, eg. to look at the CMS system and to what extent it can be used in an evaluation program.

He felt that outcome indicators such as recidivism could be used to measure PO’s successes as much as CBO successes with youth.

He imagined that a research/evaluator would be very useful to the Dept.

Comm Beijen requested that at the next committee meeting they will describe the relationship, if any, between the CMS and evaluation programs and how that system may be used for evaluation purposes.

(public comments)

There were none.

 5.

(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Update on progress of girls’ services committee meeting.

Comm Beijen reviewed, in Comm Rojas’s absence, the progress of setting up this meeting. It will be Oct. 24, and has just been put together. He also commented that the initial proposal by the Committee for a Commission directive for a girls unit was a little premature, leading to some misunderstanding among some CBOs. This had since been cleared up, but is a lesson for the committee to not be detail oriented, trying to lay out the all the processes and protocols, but to construct the general principle that the Commission will be able to direct to the Dept.

The Chief said that he had forwarded a letter inviting POs to that meeting, to the Director of Probation Services.

He further reported that at the Bd of Supervisors Finance committee meeting he was asked how he (the Dept) would use a proposed $66K in violence suppression funds, through OT. He indicated to Supervisor Bevan Dufty that a specialized girls unit needed. The Supervisor is fully supporting of this. It may be possible to initiate this by January.  He is also anticipating implementing the youth assessment screening instrument (YASI) with the Zellerbach grant.

He said he also told the Bd of Supervisors that if they allowed 6 PO hires for the Dept, it would only cost 2 (given Title 4e reimbursements).

He further said that the Bd of Supervisors is considering funding some of the CBOs that were not funded this last cycle of RFPs.

(public comments)

There were none.

 6.

(DISCUSSION) Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Program Committee of the Juvenile Probation Commission
There were none.

 7.

(ACTION) Announcements, future agenda items.  Adjournment

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:00pm.