Fall 2020_TPA Magazine-Draft-9.2.2020

Fall 2020 Texas Probation The official publication of the Texas Probation Association Special Issue The History of Probation in Texas Ever Heard of JAC/PAC? Highlight on Staff: New Members, Profiles Director’s Corner

On the Cover... The Cass County courthouse located in Linden, Texas dates back to 1861 and is the oldest documented, continuously functioning county courthouse in Texas. First restoration efforts on the building took place in 1934 when roof repairs were needed and colored stucco was added to the exterior, and all historic fabric from its original construction time period. Light fixtures and globes, mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems were updated. Bowie County, Dallam County, and Cass County, Texas are the only three coun- ties in Texas to border two other U.S. States. Cass County also forms part of the tripoint of Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana. There are 254 counties in Texas, 123 Texas Probation adult probation departments, and 166 juvenile probation agencies. 2 Texas Probation

TEXAS PROBATION ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS President Adult Discipline Mike Wolfe Greg Dillon, PhD Taylor County CSCD-retired Brazoria County CSCD 2101 Gathright Dr. 1524 E. Mulberry, Suite 200 Abilene, TX 79606 3 Angleton, TX 77515 25-665-4325 979-653-5183 Vice President Adult Discipline Karma Chambless Kelli Kirkland Matagorda CSCD Harrison County CSCD P.O. Box 2279 200 W. Houston, Ste 336 Bay City, TX 77404 Marshall, TX 75670 979-245-4569 903-923-4016 Treasurer Adult Discipline Arnold Patrick Magdalena Morales-Aina Hidalgo County CSCD El Paso County CSCD 3100 S. Business Hwy 281 800 E. Overland, Ste. 100 Edinburg TX 78539 El Paso, TX 79901 956-587-6000 915 864-2131 Secretary At Large Donna Damon Jarvis Anderson Bastrop County Bexar County CSCD CSCD PO Box 751 207 N. Comal Bastrop, TX 78602 San Antonio, TX 78207 512-581-4201 210-335-7320 Parliamentarian At Large Chris Thomas Marcy Anthony Jasper CSCD Angelina County CSCD 121 N. Austin Rm 301 P.O. Box 908 Jasper, TX 75951 Lufkin, TX 75902 409-224-7151 936-633-7664 Juvenile Discipline At Large Linda Brooke David Rowan Tarrant JPD, retired Lubbock/Crosby CSCD 2625 Ryan Place 701 Main Street Ft Worth, TX 76110 Lubbock, TX 79401 (512)-431-8333 806-755-1200 Juvenile Discipline Alumni Board Member Bennie Medlin Edward Kelly Tarrant County JPD Galveston CSCD, retired 2701 Kimbo Road 409-761-0220 Fort Worth, TX 76111 817-838-4600 Secretariat Juvenile Discipline Angela Semar Lisa Tomlinson Sam Houston State University Grayson County JPD Huntsville, TX 77341 86 Dyess 936-294-1640 Dennison, TX 75020 903-786-6326 3

4 Texas Probation Texas Probation

5

Table of Contents 8 Times May Have Changed but the Struggles are Still the Same 12 Juvenile Dispatch 14 Times May Have Changed, but the Struggles are Still the Same 17 Veterans Day Tribute 21 Spotlight on Staff 22 Profile of an Officer 28 An Interview with Dallas County 4C SAFPF Reentry Court Judge, Robert W. Francis (Ret.): How COVID- 19 has affected the Court 34 Ever Heard of PAC/JAC Meetings? 38 Director’s Corner—Rodolfo Perez, Director of Travis County CSCD 44 News Flash– What’s Going on with CSCDs? 46 Juvenile News Dispatch 6

TPA Services Directory Submission Guidelines Advertising [email protected] for Authors Darin Deutsch [email protected] General Magazine [email protected] The Texas Probation Association produces a quarterly Inquiries [email protected] periodical, the Texas Probation magazine, in Winter, Dr. Kelli Martin Spring, Summer and Fall. The magazine generally General TPA includes a combination of feature articles, special es- Inquiries says, departmental articles from both juvenile and Angela Semar adult community corrections agencies, profile of com- Sales munity corrections staff from around the state, and TPA Membership significant news from the field. Rick Trevino Those submitting articles for consideration should University Production Staff note that the Editorial Board is looking for original, current and relevant articles about a variety of issues Amy Bass-Wilson, Associate Director | Creative Services pertaining directly to or relating to community super- | Marketing & Communications Department, Sam Hou- vision. Original articles are accepted and can also ston State University (SHSU) have been previously published elsewhere, but per- [email protected] mission to reprint from the author(s) and the other source should accompany the submission. David Hernandez, Sr. Graphic Coordinator | Creative Services | Marketing & Communications Department, Submissions must be in English and sent in a Word Sam Houston State University document following the American Psychological As- sociation Style Guide. Use Times New Roman font For more general information about SHSU’s Marketing & size 12, one-inch margins, number the pages and type Communications Department visit: single-spaced. In general keep submissions between https://www.shsu.edu/dept/marketing/ 500 and 2,500 words, or no more than 5 pages (not including title, author information, references, tables, Texas Probation is published quarterly Winter (January), figures, and so on); longer manuscripts will be consid- Spring (April), Summer (July), and Fall (October). Sub- ered on a case-by-case basis. Footnotes are accepta- missions are due on the 15th in the month preceding pub- ble, but are not to be used for references or citations, lication. Any submissions received after the deadline will and are to be used sparingly. Do not include an ab- be saved for the following quarter’s publication. Texas stract. Use tables and figures sparingly and not dupli- Probation is published by the Texas Probation Associa- cate information already covered in-depth in the text. tion in cooperation with Sam Houston State University’s Each author(s) should send a one paragraph biography Marketing & Communications Department. along with a headshot photo and contact information, including position title, agency, contact phone number Reprint permissions. For permission to reprint material and mailing address. published in Texas Probation, please contact Executive Editor Dr. Kelli Martin at [email protected] or to The Editor and Editorial Board reserves the right to Associate Editor, Dr. Michael Noyes at Mi- reject submissions if submissions do not represent the [email protected] kind of material and information the Texas Probation Association wants published. On occasion, a peer *Community Supervision & Corrections Department (CSCD) review will be used for certain types of submissions or articles. Opinion pieces are not accepted. The manu- *Juvenile Probation Department (JPD) script should be proofread and free of spelling and grammatical errors. Citations not formatted in APA style will be returned to the author(s) for reformatting. 7

Texas Probation Editorial Board and Publications Committee Kelli D. Martin, PhD Karla Kutch Executive Editor Copy Editor Taylor, Callahan & Coleman Counties Brazoria County CSCD CSCD P.O. Box 1300 301 Oak St. Angleton, TX 77516-1300 Abilene, TX 79602 713-844-1721 325-674-1247 [email protected] [email protected] Darin Deutsch Michael Noyes, PhD Advertising Liaison Associate Editor Brazos County CSCD University of North Texas at Dallas P.O. Box 2015 7300 University Hills Blvd. Bryan, TX 77806-2015 Dallas, TX 75241 979-361-4538 972-338-1836 [email protected] [email protected] William Hurley Steven Henderson, M.A. Website Content Liaison Copy Editor Matagorda/Wharton County CSCD Retired Director of Lubbock & Crosby 321 E Milam St. Counties CSCD Wharton, TX 77488-5023 5809 78th St. 979-532-4413 Lubbock, TX 79424 [email protected] 806-928-5891 [email protected] Stephanie Smith Social Media Liaison Rodolfo Perez, M.A. Brazos County CSCD Copy Editor P.O. Box 2015 Travis County CSCD Bryan, TX 77806-2015 411 W. 13th St., Suite #400 979-361-4538 Austin, TX 78701 [email protected] 512-854-4600 [email protected] *Community Supervision & Corrections Department (CSCD) *Juvenile Probation Department (JPD)

EDITOR’S MESSAGE Welcome to the new Texas Probation maga- zine! For decades the publication of the Texas Pro- bation Association has been a “journal,” but was not really a journal in the traditional, or academic, sense of the word. We decided it was time to provide our members and readership with a more modern and engaging periodical, so we are pleased to bring you the first edition of the Association’s new Texas Pro- bation magazine. You will find some familiar features in our new periodical with a fresh new look, including profiles of community supervision professionals from around the state, as well as interesting stories from the field highlighting things like new programs, innovations, collaborations or community service or volunteer work community supervision professionals engage in to give back to their communities. The Texas Probation Association believes it is important to recognize the hardworking profession- als dedicated to transforming lives and enhancing public safety. The job of a community su- pervision officer can be a “thankless” one at times because clients may view the officer as an ‘enemy’ instead of an ‘ally,’ and sometimes supervisors forget to “thank” their staff or provide positive reinforcement on a regular basis to help keep staff encouraged when things get rough, so TPA wants to recognize staff from across the state as much as possible! Texas Probation will also now include a new feature, Director’s Corner, where directors from around the state, both juvenile and adult, are asked to be guest columnists to discuss important and emerging concerns in our field. We will have a variety of articles covering day- to-day concerns of staff, as well as new trends in research to help keep members updated on these issue. We hope you find the new magazine format as exciting as the Editorial Staff. Warm regards, Kelli D. Martin, PhD 9

LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT It’s hard to believe Fall is here. This year has been one for the record books to say the least. I know many people who are ready for 2021 to get here quickly so we can put 2020 behind us. Despite the difficulties this year has brought us both personally and professionally, community supervision staff across the state rose to the challenge. Peo- ple adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic to supervise offenders in new ways in the com- munity, to adapt in the office when needed whether it was on a daily basis, weekly ba- sis or when changes were implemented by the State or County. In this issue of Texas Probation articles and features are designed to “Reintroduce Probation and TPA” to our readers, provide a bit of history, educate about state-level initiatives and activities so our professionals have a more well-rounded knowledge base of community supervision not just within their own agencies, but around the state. We hope our readers will enjoy this new format of Texas Probation. There are many new and exciting features. This issue is chock full of many interesting articles, news and highlights of staff around the state. Our Publications Committee will also be recognized now as the Editorial Board for the magazine. They have put in a lot of hard work in revamping our periodical to be more engaging and appealing to our membership. So, please take the time to really read all of the different features and articles. Continue staying healthy and well, and on behalf of the Board of Directors, I thank all of the community supervision staff that have worked tirelessly the last six months throughout the pandemic. Your efforts have not gone unnoticed. Respectfully, 10

Texas Probation Association Committees Adult Legislative Registration Arnold Patrick Hidalgo Co CSCD Lupe Washington Brenna Bubela Brazos Co JPD Mike Wolfe Taylor Co CSCD, Wharton Co CSCD Retired Advanced Education Sales Tarrant Co CSCD Tracy Robinson Jefferson Co CSCD Jennie Hoop Johnson Co Brandi Nelson CSCD Awards and Resolutions LaTricia Coleman Jefferson Co CSCD Exhibitors Nueces Co CSCD Silent Auction Hidalgo Co CSCD Rick Morales Jasper Co CSCD Leo Perez, Jr. Cameron Co CSCD Kelly Tootle Ana Rodriguez Finance Technology Nueces Co CSCD Cara Drenner Rick Morales Brazoria Co CSCD Juvenile Legislative Site Selection Gregg Co CSCD, Terri Smith Dallas Co JPD Aris Johnson Retired Jefferson Co JPD Linda Brook Tarrant Co JPD, Ed Cockrell Jasper Co CSCD Chris Thomas Retired Membership Harris Co JPD Iris Bonner-Lewis Nueces Co JPD Rick Trevino Nominations Bowie Co CSCD Winfred Fulce 11

JUVENILE DISPATCH NCJFCJ Recog- “Judge Sakai is always inventive when it nizes Judge Pe- ter Sakai as comes to new ideas on how to help youth in 2020 Innovator of the Year the foster care system,” said Barbara Schafer, at Annual Justice Innovation Awards programs administrator, Children's Court Divi- sion for Bexar County. “Last year, with less The National Council of Juvenile and than three percent of our aging-out-of-care Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) announced youth going to college, he convened a meeting Judge Peter Sakai of Bexar County, Texas as with the college university systems in our com- the 2020 Innovator of the Year Award recipient munity, providing a connection to our foster during the 6th annual Justice Innovation care youth. Judge Sakai along with Court Ap- Awards ceremony at the NCJFCJ’s Virtual An- pointed Special Advocates and the University nual Conference. Judge Sakai was recognized of Texas at San Antonio drafted a bill for the for his work and efforts to innovatively rethink, Texas Legislature. Our entire San Antonio del- reimagine, and redefine justice for children and egation, regardless of political party, supported families, thus advancing the NCJFCJ’s vision— this bill. We secured over $3 million dollars for a society in which every family and child has two years. We now have 22 graduates attend- access to fair, equal, effective and timely jus- ing one of the universities and community col- tice. leges in our city, 43 participants in our docket The Innovator of the Year Award honors and 17 on a waiting list in only nine months.” an active, in-good-standing NCJFCJ member As a result of this work, the division cre- who has inspired, sponsored, promoted or led ated a College Bound Docket in the judiciary, an innovation or accomplishment of national with a specialized focus on education and edu- significance in juvenile justice, child abuse and cation preparedness. The team hired a foster neglect, family law, and/or domestic violence. care youth to be their \"expert\" on youth matters “Judge Sakai is widely recognized for and how the judiciary could better help young his innovative approach to child welfare, con- people. Through services aimed at improving stantly challenging all involved in the system to self-esteem and improving young peoples’ abil- more effectively serve the families that come ity to make responsible decisions, the docket is into his courtroom,” said Judge Dan H. Mi- designed to bridge the gap between foster care chael, NCJFCJ president. “We are honored to and independent adulthood. call Judge Sakai a member of the NCJFCJ and commend him for his forward-thinking to help keep families together and improve children's lives.” 12

Judge Sakai has more than 30 years of tion and conflict resolution. child welfare experience. In 2006, he was elect- ed to the 225th District Court bench, succeeding About the National Council of Juvenile and Fami- his friend and mentor, Senior Judge John J. Spe- ly Court Judges (NCJFCJ): cia. Judge Sakai has also served on numerous Founded in 1937, the Reno, Nev.-based National NCJFCJ committees, the Board of Directors, and Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, is has been an enduring and dedicated member of the nation’s oldest judicial membership organiza- the NCJFCJ since 1980. Judge Sakai was born tion and focused on improving the effectiveness and raised in the Rio Grande Valley in South of our nation’s juvenile and family courts. A lead- Texas. At the age of 27 years old, he was ap- er in continuing education opportunities, re- pointed to be the Chief of the Juvenile Section of search, and policy development in the field of the District Attorney's Office. He left the D.A.'s juvenile and family justice, the 2,000-member office for private practice. In 1989, he was ap- organization is unique in providing practice- pointed to be the Juvenile Master/Referee of the based resources to jurisdictions and communi- 289th District Court (Juvenile Court). In 1995, he ties nationwide. was appointed to the Children's Court bench by Texas Juvenile Justice Department the unanimous vote of Bexar County Civil District (TJJD) Governing Board to Meet in Court Judges. He was assigned to hear cases that involved child abuse and neglect and adop- Mid-October tion involving foster children. Judge Sakai re- ceived his Bachelor of Arts degree from the Uni- The 13-member governing board of the versity of Texas at Austin in 1976 and graduated Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) with a Doctorate of Jurisprudence from the Uni- meets several times a year at locations across versity of Texas Law School in 1979. the state. Committee Meetings will begin Octo- Through Judge Sakai's leadership, adop- ber 22, 2020 and the Board Meeting will be held tion of foster children in Bexar County increased October 23, 2020-19 concerns. nearly 1000 percent from 1995 to 2005. Bexar TJJD Response to COVID-19 County routinely leads the State of Texas for the number of foster children with consummated adoptions and permanent homes. For his efforts, TJJD is focused on public safety and they President (then Governor) George W. Bush rec- safety of the youth and staff at Juvenile Agen- ognized Judge Sakai and his model court on the cies. The organization remains in daily contact Governor's Committee to Promote Adoption. with the Office of the Governor, the Office of the The NCJFCJ also honored Margaret M. Lieutenant Governor, The Texas Department of Crowley of Reno, Nev. as the Impact of the Year State Health Services, and the Texas Depart- Award recipient for her practice improvements ment of Emergency Management. As of implemented state or jurisdiction-wide in media- 9/1/2020 since the pandemic began in March, 13

2020: Ector County Commissioners Approve New  196 youth in secure facilities have tested Juvenile Detention Center positive for COVID-19:  Evins Regional Juvenile Center: 31 Back in August, 2020 Ector County com-  Gainseville State School: 13 missioners approved the construction of a new  Giddings State School: 84 juvenile detention center at the cost of $25 mil-  McLennan County State Juvenile Correc- lion. The photo below is a view of a residence tional Facility: 42 hall at the current Ector County Youth Center.  Ron Jackson State Juvenile Correctional Complex: 26 Moreover, 171 staff members at secure facili- ties have tested positive for COVID-19:  Evins Regional Juvenile Center: 55  Gainesville State School: 11  Giddings State School: 41  McLennan County State Juvenile Correc- tional Facility: 23  Ron Jackson State Juvenile Correctional Complex: 41 For up-to-date information about TJJD COVID- 19 response please visit: www.tjjd.texas.gov/ The National Partnership for Juvenile Services NPJS provides opportunities to engage with leaders and direct care professionals in learn- ing and networking events including the annu- al National Symposium on Juvenile Services; local, state, and regional events. NPJS also offers custom training development and a host of training modules for sale. 14

JUVENILE DISPATCH 15

Times May Have Changed, but the Struggles are Still the Same By Jim Stott I guess one of the good things about be- Adult Probation Commission (TAPC). Case- ing asked to write an article about the old days loads of 300 or 400 were not unheard of. More of adult probation is the pride you have in re- so back than it is than today, incarceration was calling some of the experiences you have wit- king, and probation was seen by many as one nessed over the years, both positive and nega- of those coddling, “feel good” type of programs tive. I still get asked on occasion about how I that kept offenders from getting the punishment am enjoying retirement and I generally reply the general public (and many in the criminal jus- with what a police chief friend of mine told me tice community) felt they truly deserved, which years ago, “I miss some of the clowns, but do was jail or prison. Funding came from the col- not miss the circus.” Still true. While I still get lection of probation fees, (then mandated at $10 to see some of the old “clowns” through my per month) and the few statutory requirements work with Mel Brown and Associates, it seems placed on the local counties, which was terribly many of us dinosaurs are moving on. Rapidly, I inadequate. Many departments were combined find myself seeing more and more faces I do (Juvenile and Adult Divisions) and housed in not know. the same building, sometimes even in the same There are colleagues out here who recall office. Most officers shared offices, and in much more than I about the way adult probation some cases, even telephones. I recall sharing has evolved over the years. And, I am sure an office and a telephone with a County Judge some have different opinions about the positive once. That arrangement lasted until I was able or negative benefits regarding the multitude of to convince Commissioners Court that I needed changes that have taken place over the years. separate accommodations, and if possible, a While my memories have faded some, I am telephone. With the uncontested blessing of sure they have for others as well. But, I believe the County Judge, office space was approved we all look back with pride on the accomplish- once an unused closet was located, but approv- ments we made, rather than the blood, the al of the additional $10 per month for the phone tears, and the toll it took on our lives to make was the real challenge, taking a few more meet- them a reality. ings. Similar experiences were commonplace Adult Probation was quite different prior all throughout the state. to 1977, when Senate Bill 39 created the Texas 16

Compared to what we have today, re- programs, such as Restitution Centers, would sources for offenders were sparse in most de- begin to appear. We all felt were on track to partments and almost nil in others. Where they bring about change. I recall a feeling of excite- existed, programs like AA and NA were the gold ment for being allowed to witness and assist in standard. Understandably, these programs, enacting those changes. I believe all of us did. based on anonymity, are not keen on having Prior to TAPC, all we ever had was what offenders in their groups who are ordered to at- was available, which was close to nothing. tend by the courts. It was disruptive and not With so few resources for offenders and only utilized at all in some counties because of this few folks outside of our system who even cared problem. Funding for treatment like counseling about probation, it was a welcomed relief. We and residential services was extremely limited felt that finally, the spirit of cooperation between and only based on what your budget could af- the field and someone who cared was there. ford, or what services other programs could of- Although the partnership was not without ten- fer at no cost to you. sion on occasion, it was generally resolved, as In 1977, through the hard work of TPA, we all knew we shared a common goal. several probation directors and a state legisla- The tension we felt, I believe, was that tor named Jerry “Nub” Donaldson, the Texas many were fearful of the state taking over pro- Adult Probation Commission or TAPC, as it was bation operations. We were very fearful of los- called, was created. TAPC was the precursor ing our autonomy and did not want the state to the Community Justice Assistance Division forcing us to do things we knew would not work, (CJAD) of the Texas Department of Criminal primarily through unfunded mandates. Each Justice. Established as a regulatory agency, it county was (and is) different in what they are provided much needed financial support to local able provide. Our autonomy was important, probation departments, initially to fund addition- and we relayed that as often as we could to an- al staff and reduce caseloads to a more man- yone who would listen. Skeptical of this, but ageable level. The goal was to reduce commit- excited for the adventure, I think we were all ments to the state prison system. By allocating hopeful that the new relationship between the funds to local probation departments, the state state and the probation community would reap felt commitments to the costly prison system benefits that none of us had ever seen, thereby could be reduced. The reduced caseloads did improving the system to make our communities help to curtail the rates of incarceration some, a safer place for everyone. but we all dreamed of specialized programs Community Supervision has always had which would help reduce them even more, de- to fight to maintain funding levels, and probably terring our offender populations from any future always will. While we have had many legisla- involvement in the criminal justice system. It tive champions along the way, we still struggle was not until 1981 that funding for programs to keep our heads above water. Battles to fend such as Intensive Supervision and residential off unfunded mandates, a fearful consolidation 17

with parole and struggles to maintain what we Jim Stott worked in have exists today, just as it did then. We all the field of community worked hard to insure we had a voice in our fu- supervision for nearly ture and did not leave our fate to the hands of 40 years. He began bureaucrats. The necessary evil called statis- his career as as a su- tics, which we gather to support our mission to pervision officer in provide resources to offenders, protect the pub- 1976. In just four lic and work toward the common good are all years he was promot- tied to individuals with problems. They all need ed to Supervisor and held that position for four our help and we need to keep that as our focus. years. In 1984 he was promoted to Deputy Di- That has never changed. rector, a position he held for 25 years. In 2009, I am happy that Kelli asked me to con- Jim was appointed Director of Jefferson County tribute an article on the early days of adult pro- CSCD and retired in 2014. Prior to his career in bation. It brought back a lot of memories. It probation, he was a Corrections Officers for the gave me an opportunity to recall many, many Texas Department of Corrections from 1973- good times with old friends. It also helped me 1976. Mr. Stott obtained a Bachelor of Science to recall many of the people who worked so in Criminal Justice and Corrections from Sam hard to make the system a much better place. Houston State University in 1976, Jim is semi- Some are still around, and I stay in touch with retired and works as a part-time consultant for them as best I can, but many of them have Mel Brown & Associates. passed on. If I start naming names, I am sure to leave some out. But for a good start, if you attend a TPA Awards ceremony and do not know the namesake of an award, find a baby boomer in the crowd and ask. Chances are that you will get more of an education than you bargained for, but it will be worth it! 18

Happy Veterans Day November 11, 2020 On behalf of the Texas Probation Association, we would like to thank all veterans for their service and especially community supervision staff and those TPA members who served their country in the United States Armed Forces. ADD PHOTOS OF TPA MEMBERS HERE, AND ON FOLLOWING PAGE Sunday Dieke Sgt. Karalyn Martin, USMC OIF Greg Mason 19

Sgt.Karalyn Mar- tin, USMC Tarrant County CSCD Karalyn Martin is a Ma- rine Corps veteran from Corsicana, Texas. She enlisted in the USMC at age 17. Kara was an Aviation Hydraulic Structural Mechanic. She served 5-1/2 years, one forward de- ployment to Iwakuni, Japan and one combat deployment - Operation Enduring Freedom in 2011. She overcame many obstacles while in the military and upon her honorable discharge she ob- tained a Bachelor’s degree in Psychology and a Master’s degree in Social Work, concentrating on veterans’ ser- vices and mental health issues. She is an ambassador for Air Power Foundation and is a great mom to her two children and two dogs. Kara is a finalist in the Ms. Veter- an America Competition which raises awareness and money for homeless female veterans. 20

MORE ON VETERANS 21

20

MORE ON VETERANS 21

NEW MEMBER RECRUITMENT CONTEST Results of the TPA Membership Drive are in! Current TPA mem- bers were asked to recruit new members to TPA and the first place winner would receive a $200 gift card for recruiting at least 20 new members (not membership renewals). The sec- ond place winner would receive a $100 gift card for recruiting at least 10 new members. A big congratulations to _________ for recruiting ____ new members to TPA! ___________ is an officer at _________ County officer for __ ___________ is the second place winner who recruited ___ new members. ________ has been an CSCD. He/she has been an officer for over ___ years and currently su- pervises a ________ caseload. years and began career at _______ _________. He/she currently works for County CSCD. More here about _____. Photo of first place winner Photo of 2nd place winner 22

SPOTLIGHT ON STAFF Welcome New TPA Members or Renewal Memberships Roland Andrade—Bexar Co CSCD Marshay Love—Dallas County CSCD Lacy Bambico—Grayson Co CSCD Roberta Lusk—Dallas County CSCD Bridgette Barfield—Gonzales Co CSCD, ISF Gregory Marshall—Burnet Co CSCD Karalyn Martin—Tarrant Co CSCD Julie Barnes—Parker Co CSCD Angela Meraz—Grayson Co CSCD Lori Bartts—Taylor Co CSCD Cristina Meza—Burnet Co CSCD Matthew Boultinghouse—Burnet Co CSCD Crista Morales—Grayson Co CSCD David Brignac—Dallas Co CSD Jeanette Murray—Burnet Co CSCD Tiffany Canela—Webb Co CSCD Sunjere Nightingale—Bexar Co CSCD Taylor Carr—Caldwell Co CSCD Elizabeth Orozco—Harris Co JPD Patricia Ceniceros—El Paso Co CSCD Amanda Owens—Polk Co CSCD Mario Compean—Juvenile, Hidalgo Co Boot Dee Pedigo—Dallas Co CSCD Sean Pedigo—Dallas Co CSCD Camp Karen Cozby—Burnet Co CSCD Blake Powers—Angelina Co JPD Robert Cruz—Bexar Co CSCD Michele Richey—Burnet Co CSCD Syble Davidson—Tarrant Co CSCD Selene Rincon—Hidalgo Co CSCD Marci De La Cruz—Burnet Co CSCD Tyrone Durham—Juvenile, Hidalgo Co Boot Jeanne Rios—Burnet Co CSCD Brett Rose—Taylor Co CSCD Camp Brandy Scott—Brazos Co CSCD Hope Ellett—Burnet Co CSCD Angela Sheeley—Anderson Co CSCD Olivia Espinoza—Burnet Co CSCD Phoenix Sheffield—Tarrant Co CSCD Sonia Fernandez—Grayson Co CSCD Regina Sheffield—Angelina Co CSCD Desiray Finney—Grayson Co CSCD Christopher Simler—Harris Co JPD Phillip Galli—University of Wisconsin, River Falls Ryan Skloss—Bexar Co CSCD Jill Garner—Grayson Co CSCD Marquetta Smith-Sanders—Dallas Co CSCD Tessa Garza—Starr Co CSCD Julie Theriot—Burnet Co CSCD Benjamin Gonzalez—Hidalgo Co Boot Camp Greg Town—CHI Program, East Baton Rouge Jessica Graham—Taylor Co CSCD Sylvia Trejo—Hidalgo Co CSCD David Gray—Grayson Co CSCD Annie Villavicencio—Harris Co JPD Juan Guerra—Juvenile, Hidalgo Co Boot Camp Patricia Wadsworth—Burnet Co CSCD Kacie Hand—Johnson Co JPD William Warnky—Salvation Army Substance Carlton Hanson—Burnet Co CSCD Deana Hernandez—Harris Co CSCD, Student Abuse Program Alyssa Jones—Waller Co CSCD Diane Wells—Burnet Co CSCD Mikki Joy—Burnet Co CSCD Lita Wells—Jefferson Co CSCD Tamesia Keaton-Talley—Tarrant Co CSCD Jamika Wester—Wester Law Office Kelsey Kelley—Burnet Co CSCD Deirdre Williams—Bridge Development Center, Clifford Kennedy—Haskell Co JPD Brandy Kieschnick—Jefferson Co CSCD Fort Bend Co Suzanne Lebet—Tarrant County CSCD Doug Yates—Grayson Co CSCD 23

PROFILE OF OFFICERS Sara Ornelas, Juvenile Probation Officer Guadalupe County Juvenile Probation Department Sara Ornelas grew up in Coahuila, Mexico. She moved to Seguin, Texas when she was 9 years old. She recalls wanting to help people from an early age and would invite other neighbor- hood children to come to her house to be fed and clothed if she saw there was a need. Sara received multiple awards and recognitions while attending Seguin High School, in- cluding being in the top 10% of her class, recipient of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Scholarship and being a member of Skills USA competing in the area of Criminal Justice. Upon graduation in 2007 she attended Texas State University in San Marcos. While working on her Bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice she participated in several internships that helped her de- velop a better understanding of different aspects of the criminal justice system. Sara completed an internship with Hays County Victim Services Division of the District Attorney’s office. In the fall of 2010, Ms. Ornelas completed an internship with Guadalupe County Juvenile Probation Department. During this internship she became more interested in this field and working with youth. Then in 2011, Sara graduated Magna Cum Laude from Texas State University with a Bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice. Sara was involved in the Honor Society Alpha Phi Sigma during her time at Texas State. She began her career in Juvenile services in 2012 as a Detention Supervision Officer in the Guadalupe Juvenile Detention Center. She worked there 21/2 years full time before becoming part time. Sara remembers truly developing a compassionate heart for the youth she worked with after being exposed to all the trauma and experiences those juveniles she supervised went through. Sara also developed a passion for being part of the change in the community with these youth in and out of detention and learned the im- portance of listening to their voiced or unvoiced outcries. Sara has worked for Guadalupe County Juvenile Services for a little over 8 years. In 2014 Sara stayed part-time with the County and went to work 21/2 years with Bluebonnet Trails Community services, the local Behavioral Health/Intellectual and De- velopmental Disabilities Center. While working there Sara learned a lot about the increasing number of mental health needs in the community and helped families access re- sources. Sara worked as a Spanish Intake Coordinator 24

and as a Case Manager carrying a caseload of Just recently, Sara also became involved in the 40-50 adult and juvenile clients. Sara helped conference planning committee with TPA. her clients develop long-term plans so they can Sara is an easy person to talk to and can live successfully in the community, out of group develop a trusting bond with her probationers. homes or mental health facilities. Sara coordi- She is dedicated to listening and ensuring that nated resources for the clients and their families all things are considered for the youth and com- on a monthly basis and supervised their effec- munity’s best interest. Being a fluent Spanish tiveness. Sara worked closely with phycologists/ speaker, Sara has been a great help in working psychiatrists in evaluating the needs of the cli- with Spanish speaking families as she can com- ents and to determine what treatment needs municate effectively with them and ease their were appropriate. During her time with this added concerns when it comes to dealing with agency Sara underwent training in areas such legal issues. as suicide prevention, behavioral health, case Sara enjoys spending time with her fami- management, abuse and exploitation, Autism ly (especially nephew and nieces) and her fur and substance abuse. baby/German Shepard, Napoleon. She is in- To follow her career path in Criminal Jus- volved in her church, loves to read and exercise tice and her passion with working with youth, outdoors. Sara returned to work as a full-time employee Sara wants to continue making a differ- with Guadalupe County in 2017 as a Juvenile Probation Officer. She currently supervises a ence in her community by helping youth focus on their strengths and develop into positive citi- general case- zens. load. A normal week at work for Sara can include but is not limited to the following: testifying in court for detention or Adjudication hearings, com- pleting office, home and school visits, intakes, curfew checks, coordinating classes with the facility nurse for young girls (12-17) in regards to their physical wellbeing and supervising com- munity service activities at the local community garden, food bank, adopt a highway or building ramps for the Texas Ramp Project. Through community service the youth learn to give back to their communities in ways they had never thought to and along the way develop close re- lationships with mentors who they can look up to and learn valuable skills from. 25

Laura Long Coker, Adult to Tarleton State University where she graduat- Community Supervision ed with a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Jus- tice in 1993. Laura began working in the Crimi- Officer nal Justice field in 1993 where she was hired to Erath County Community be a Court Officer for the Hood County Com- munity Supervision and Corrections Depart- Supervision ment. She, along with another officer, took care & Corrections Department of District and County Courts in Hood County. She also supervised the Indirect Caseload for all of Hood County. She was then promoted to Laura Long the Misdemeanor Area Supervisor and also Coker was continued to handle the Courts. In 2000, Laura born on Sep- took a Community Supervision Officer position tember 19, in Erath County where she continues to be to 1970 in Forth date. During her time as an officer she has Worth, Tex- prepared grants, supervised the SAFPF case- as. Laura load, and was also the Victim Officer for many explains her years. Laura has made many great friends parents as over the years in this hard-working dedicated the \"best industry. people in the She has been a member of TPA for world,\" and many years and helped with the convention the absolute planning committee in Tarrant County. Laura reason why has been a CSO for over 27 years and has she is the person she is today. Laura's dad maintained her sanity through all of the chang- passed away in 2009, however, he still lives on es in those years! Laura likes to have a good in her heart and mind on a daily basis. Her time but always knows when to step in and be mom is still living and is a huge part of her life. the serious one when needed. She prides her- Laura’s parents would always help any- self on being compassionate and consistent. one in need, and she learned at a very young age to be the person who is there when need- ed and to always offer a helping hand. Laura has two boys who are very important in her life. She can only dream that they will be people who help others in their community. Erath County, TX Laura graduated from Granbury High School in 1988, and upon graduation went on

Jessica Colclasure, Adult Community Supervision Officer Grayson County Community Supervision & Corrections Jessica Colclasure was born and raised to the North Texas area and began her profes- in Eastern North Carolina, in a family with ties sional career as a telecommunications operator to criminal justice and the military. With her fa- for the Grayson County Sheriff's Office. She ther serving as Chief of Police for a local col- enjoyed the fast-paced nature of the job, which lege and as an investigator for the Sheriff's Of- included answer- fice, and with her mother working as assistant ing 911 calls, dis- to the District Attorney, she knew she wanted to patching fire, EMS work in the criminal justice field someday as and law enforce- well. When she was a junior in high school, ment, and provid- Jessica’s brother followed in the footsteps of ing vital infor- their grandfather and joined the United States mation to each. It Air Force. While attending Southside High was also through School, Jessica participated in volleyball, golf this position that and was on the local swim team. Grayson County, TX After graduating high school in 2010, Jessica was able to hear firsthand from victims Jessica wasted no time starting work towards of crime, and provide them with a much needed her degree in criminal justice, signing up for col- stable voice in times of crisis. As her time with lege classes immediately. During college, she the Sheriff's Office continued, Jessica knew she found time to study, work, and complete anoth- wanted to stay in the field but wanted to work er long term goal of becoming a NAUI certified more closely with offenders. Therefore in 2015, scuba diver. During her final year of school she Jessica chose to advance her career and ac- completed an internship with the Pitt County cepted a position with the Grayson County Sheriff's Office in North Carolina. While working CSCD as a felony supervision officer. In that with the Sherriff's Department, she enjoyed new position she thrived, finding the ability to working closely with deputies by going on pa- utilize the skills and knowledge gained in all of trol, working traffic stops and accidents, work- her previous positions to enable her to effec- ing with the K-9 Unit and going with the forensic tively work with a diverse and challenging popu- investigators to crime scenes. Her internship lation. This knowledge would later come in helped solidify her decision to work in the crimi- handy again, as the Grayson County CSCD nal Justice field, and she received her Bache- called upon her with her knowledge and certifi- lor's Degree in Criminal Justice and Psychology cation as a NCIC/TCIC operator to assist the from East Carolina University in May 2014. department in obtaining a TLETs terminal. Shortly after graduation, Jessica moved

When not at work, Jessica enjoys hiking, hunting, riding horses and generally any outdoor activity. In September 2019, Jessica took on the most rewarding aspect of her life to date, when she gave birth to her son. Since his birth, she spends the majority of her spare time with him going swimming and walking at the park. As Jessica's history shows, she enjoys learning new things and taking on new challeng- es. While the Grayson County CSCD has pro- vided an opportunity to work in the field she loves, Jessica has aspirations of advancing her career further. She hopes to transition into working a specialized caseload, in effort to max- imize her ability to effect change with high risk/ high need populations. Jessica has aspirations of moving into the Federal System one day as well. 28

ADVERTISEMENTS HERE ON THIS PAGE 29

An Interview with Dallas County 4C SAFPF Reentry Court Judge, Robert W. Francis (Ret.): How COVID-19 Has Affected the Court By Michael E. Noyes, Ph.D. Associate Editor—Texas Probation (This article contains excerpts from a series of telephone interviews conducted on June 23, 2020 and August 3, 2020) As the retired presiding judge of Criminal District Court #3 of Dallas County, Judge Robert W. Francis has served the citizens of Dallas County with conservative values and an innovative approach to reducing crime. Judge Francis started his road to public service as an Assistant District Attorney in Dallas County. Under the leadership of then Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade, Judge Francis rose through the ranks to become a felony prosecutor and later mentored young prosecutors as they began their career at the DA’s office. He has prosecuted thousands of criminal cases, even seeking the death penalty in a capital murder case. After his service with the Dallas County DA’s Office, Judge Francis built a successful law practice in Dallas, Texas. During this period of his career, Judge Francis was able to represent accused citizens and defend the constitution giving him a greater perspective of how the criminal judicial system works. In 1997, Judge Francis was sworn in as presiding judge of Criminal District Court #3 of Dallas County after winning a highly competitive race in which four other candidates sought this open bench. Since his first day on the bench, Judge Francis has continued striving for justice and innovative ways to handle the many cases that come through his court. Judge Francis has moved over 15,000 cases through the Dallas County court system. Although his daily court schedule keeps him extremely busy, his commitment to finding new ways to deal with the ever increasing crime rate led to the formation of the first SAFPF Re-Entry court in the State of Texas. The Dallas SAFPF Re-Entry court is designed to stop crime by preventing addicts from returning to their addiction. Probationers who complete the Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Facility (SAFPF) program return to Judge Francis’s court for intensive aftercare to ensure com- pliance with the conditions of their probation. This program has had one of the highest success rates of any treatment program in the country. The results ensure that people who complete the SAFPF Re-Entry Court curriculum will not return to their criminal behavior and this prevents the citizens of the State of Texas from be- coming victims. This court has received local, state and national recognition for its success. 30

Judge Francis is a frequent speaker at -------------------------------------- judicial conferences, seminars, and local com- Dr. Michael E. Noyes: Judge Francis, thank-you munity colleges and schools. His commitment to very much for taking time out of your schedule the judicial process has earned him high regard today to address the membership of the Texas from the Dallas legal community as evidenced Probation Association in our quarterly publica- by the high ratings in the Dallas Bar Association tion, Texas Probation. Judicial Evaluation Poll for his years as presid- Judge Robert W. Francis: You bet. Glad to do it. ing judge of Criminal District Court #3 of Dallas County. Judge Francis has also received a let- Noyes: How has the COVID 19 pandemic af- ter of recognition from Governor Perry for his fected the Dallas County 4C – SAFPF Re-Entry work with the SAFPF Re-Entry Court. Court? Judge Francis received his Bachelor of Judge Francis: In March 2020, 4C Court ended. Business Administration-Finance from the Uni- Counselling went online either with Zoom or Mi- versity of Texas at Austin and his Juris Doctor- crosoft Teams. Our probation officers have tried ate from South Texas College of Law. Judge to contact court participants by phone. And, this Francis is certified as a criminal law specialist contact approach was approved by the Commu- from the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. nity Justice Assistance Division (CJAD). Prior to He is a life member of the NRA and TSRA. COVID-19, I was bringing in one hundred and Judge Francis’ wife is a former Republican fifty (150) people a day to court. When COVID- State District Judge and is the proud father of 19 started I limited our staff to five (5) in the of- two daughters. fices and ten (10) – fifteen (15) of our 31

highest risk participants. We also shut down our ones that you do find are going to lie…or lie random UA testing, but we are going to begin to again about their use. ramp our UA testing as soon as we open curt Judge Francis: Yeah. back up. Noyes: And, their urine samples are going to be Noyes: When are you look at increasing 4C hot. Judge Francis: Even if they admit, my probation participant UA’s ? officers are contacting me by phone every day. Judge Francis: Two (2) weeks ago we met with But, they have been using everyday knowing the Dallas County Fire Marshall to discuss that they do not need to give a UA. So, when opening up the number of participants that we they do test these guys are going to have to wanted to bring to the courthouse for UAs. So, I start at relapse and start all over again. am anticipating a whole lot of AWOLs and dirty Noyes: During COVID, when you were doing UAs. I’ll have more data by the end of the week. UAs were you just requiring the highest risk cli- Our staff and counselors thought maybe we ents to appear? would have 5% of our participants abscond or Judge Francis: The highest risk people and the using. I think that it will be way higher than that. ones that just got out of SAFPF. Because I When we have called the color line (random UA want to get them started on the rigors of our testing system) during COVID-19, for our high- routine. We want to start them on the right foot. risk clients we were missing about 25% of those This has been a struggle. participants called. They were no shows. And, Noyes: Since your COVID-19 court-shutdown in of the 25% of the people showing up they have March, have you had any new releases to you admitted to using. So, I am probably looking at program from TDCJ – SAFPF? issuing warrants on half of my population of Judge Francis: Yes. We are getting people from out of SAFPF, but TDCJ has not been picking court participants. people up from the jails to go to SAFPF. So, our Noyes: Do you think that COVID-19 concerns population in the program now, at least on pa- kept them away or were they avoiding admitting per, is bigger than usual. So, I am unsure right their use? now how many people we are going to have in Judge Francis: If you do not monitor these high- the program. After we complete our UAs and risk participants, closely, in person every day warrants, in about two (2) or three (3) more for the first year fifteen (15) months, they are weeks, I’ll have a good idea who needs to go going to relapse. You cannot expect partici- back to rehab, relapse or jail. pants that have been to prison five (5) times, an Noyes: And, most of those individuals with dirty addict for twenty-five (25) years, I am going to UAs or that have absconded, you’ll be sending them in the Dallas County Jail? How is the just quit today. It is not going to happen. county going to react to that to the increase? Noyes: So, you are anticipating that you are not going to find a lot of your participants. And, the

Judge Francis: I don’t know. That is their prob- ticipants fare during the shut down ? lem. But, I know TDCJ is going to be taking Judge Francis: I go them right here. Out of two people back to SAFPF soon. So, I’ll get them hundred and eighty-five (285) participants, 14% back out. percent went AWOL. About forty (40) partici- Noyes: So, you have not held court, at all, dur- pants. And, 12.2% or thirty-five (35) partici- ing COVID-19? pants tested positive for drug usage. Of that Judge Francis: No. There were so many orders 12.2%, EVERY single participant admitted to from the Supreme Court and the Office of Court their usage. That’s 100%. I was quite pleased. Administrations (for all courts). I just shut down. We also had a couple of female participants Now, I am hoping to start back by July 13, that were / are pregnant that were clearly not 2020. I have three (3) court rooms in the pregnant prior to COVID-19. George Allen Courthouse. And, if I can bring Noyes: Those were not the numbers you were forty-five (45) people, I can split them up into anticipating when we last spoke? three (3) groups of fifteen (15) people per court Judge Francis: No. Not at all! I am most room. And the clients will be about eight (8) pleased. And, very pleased with our staff, also feet apart and they will have to wear masks. for trying to keep up with everybody during the Noyes: So the County of Dallas is going to time when we were not having court. I don’t open its courtrooms by July 13 ? know, maybe it was harder to buy dope or find Judge Francis: Yes. But regular court, I don’t dope during this time? Maybe they were scared think can convene for some time. I don’t know to go out. Or, maybe they were drinking if they how we’re going to run jury pools and jury tri- could not find their drug of choice. als? Most of the judges are doing pleas for Noyes: So, 100% of those thirty-five (35) par- people on bond and the defendants are going ticipants that tested positive for drug use admit- to get probation. You can do the pleas remotely ted prior to being tested? by computer. But, what I am doing, you know, Judge Francis: Yes. That’s true. They did not remotely is not going to work for my clients. lie to me. We have a policy in court that there They are in active addiction. will indeed be a penalty for drug use. But, the penalty is higher if you lie and I find out by test- ing. My policy is that if you tell me the truth, Follow Up Telephone Interview: August 3, 2020 there would be a range between no days in jail and increased counselling / probation meetings Noyes: Judge Francis, last we spoke in June or up to 3-5 days in jail. But, if they lie to me, your only choice was the SAFPF relapse track 2020, you indicated that you were awaiting new or revocation. Which means prison. In the past, AWOL and UA data after having reopened your a lot of people lied and ended up in the relapse 4C – SAFPF Re-Entry Court. How did your par- track and prison. I was tiered of the constant

lying. I think that in this group, somebody has participants per day. been telling them that ‘Hey this “S.O.B.” is seri- Noyes: And what about intake into your pro- ous about telling the truth. You may tell him the gram? Are you still getting participants dis- truth and do a few days in jail. And, if you lie to charged to you from SAFPF ? him. He ain’t putting up with it.’ Judge Francis: Yes we are. As, I mentioned last Noyes: Is your court now operational and at full time we talked, we are still getting TDCJ dis- capacity? charges from SAFPF. However, as you know, Judge Francis: Court opened about two (2) when COVID-19 started, TDCJ stopped picking weeks ago. But, I changed it up to maintain so- up any inmates from county jails, including cial distancing and ensure other COVID-19 pro- SAFPF participants. TDCJ just started picking tocols. inmates up from county jails. But, they are not Noyes: What changes have you made to your picking up their usual number. It is a smaller court proceedings? pick up. So, I anticipate that we are going to have some very small intakes from SAFPF in Judge Francis: Well, instead of three (3) all day the coming months. They just won’t have the session with about ninety (90) participants same volume of participants for awhile. each. I am doing three (3) court sessions a day with about fifteen (15) people. And, we are go- Noyes: Judge Francis, thank-you for taking time ing to do two (2) weeks of court and then two to explain to the membership of the Texas Pro- (2) weeks without court. During the two (2) bation Association the impact that COVID-19 weeks off, clients will do their counselling and has had on your day-to-day operations of your their probation visits. And, we will continue this 4C – SAFPF Re-Entry Court. until at least end of the year. I think two (2) Judge Francis: My pleasure. Glad to do it. weeks on and two (2) weeks off will also give the participants some time to adjust to our COVID-19 schedule and to any concerns they have about coming to court during this time. Noyes: And, are you also going to limit the number of participants randomly called in for your required UA’s ? Judge Francis: Yes. We have ensured that we will have no more than fifteen (15) participants a day reporting in for their random UA call. Noyes: What were the numbers before ? Judge Francis: About fifty (50) to fifty-five (55)

Dr. Michael E. Noyes is a lecturer at the Uni- versity of North Texas, Dallas Campus. Pro- fessor Noyes earned a Ph.D. in Criminology from Indiana University of Pennsylvania. He has spent a great deal of his career in the cor- rections field, serving as the Director of Juve- nile Court Services and then as the Director of Community Corrections in Butler, Pennsylva- nia. He also served as the Director of tallas County (Texas) CSCD. Dr. Noyes is the found- er and past president of the Community Cor- rections Improvement Foundation, whose pur- pose is to support the training of community cor- rections profes- sionals and the needs of specialty courts. 35

Ever Heard of JAC/PAC Meetings? By Leighton G. Iles, Director Tarrant County CSCD 36

37

Article on JAC/PAC CONTINUED 38

Article on JAC/PAC CONTINUED 39

DIRECTOR’S CORNER This quar- ter’s Director’s Corner feature is written by Travis County CSCD Director Rodolfo Perez and Copy Editor for Texas Probation Edito- rial Board. 40

41

42

43

A Critical Assessment of the vance understandings in economics, psycholo- Current State gy, neurology, medical science, or behavioral health. They follow the same approach for thirty of Community Corrections in years and only ask the Legislature to provide Texas funding to “purchase the same identical tool for their toolbox” to fix the problem, i. e., a hammer. By Todd Jermstad, J.D. Thirty years later the outcomes have not im- Retired Director of Bell-Lampasas CSCD proved but have only got- ten worse. The response is Imagine that a political entity in our coun- the same – they ask for an- try is facing a serious social problem, one that other of the same tools that other political entities in the country are also they have always asked for, i.e., another hammer. facing. This problem affects the lives of thou- This in a nutshell is the cur- sands if not millions of people, both directly and rent state of community indirectly, leads to a decline in its labor force, corrections in Texas. continuous victimization of its citizens, a loss of The important question is what would an tax dollars, and a diversion of public resources advanced state of community corrections, one from supporting productive institutions and en- that incorporated the latest scientific findings deavors to unproductive ones. There is growing from other disciplines, look like. concern among the constituents of this political entity about this issue and a demand that its The Current State of Corrections in America – policy makers address this problem. Then im- Does Anything Work? agine that the policy makers do meet to address In the early summer of 2018, several re- this matter, enact certain legislative measures ports were issued regarding efforts to reform the and appropriate funding to alleviate this prob- criminal justice system. They could charitably lem. The policy makers then provide the fund- be described as troubling. On June 4, the Na- ing to certain state and local government agen- tional Institute of Justice issued a report that ex- amined outcomes for persons who participated cies to deal with this issue and delegates the in the Second Chance program. The Second means to these agencies to enact policies, Chance Act (SCA) was signed into law by Presi- practices and regulations to solve this problem. dent George W. Bush in April 2008. The pur- Imagine that the government officials and pose of the SCA was to enhance public safety practitioners of these agencies attempt to solve by breaking the cycle of criminal recidivism and what has longed appeared to be an intractable improving outcomes for people returning from problem. However, in attempting to address prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. The SCA this matter they rely on a couple of rudimentary authorized the awarding of federal grants to processes advocated within the narrow field of government agencies and nonprofit organiza- sociology. They do not go outside this narrow tions to provide reentry services and programs, field of sociology and do not incorporate any ad- including employment and housing

assistance, victim support, and substance 145,341 total on hand on August 31, 2017; and abuse treatment. While laudable in its goals for FY 2018, the most recent Statistical Report, two NIJ sponsored evaluations found that par- there were 145,019 total on hand on August 31, ticipation in SCA programming did not signifi- 2018. Indeed, it appears that the State’s policy cantly reduce the likelihood of recidivism. is to revert back to its policy in the 1980s, i.e., to In a separate report issued on June 11, use prisons to confine inmates, rely on parole to 2018, entitled “Prisoners in 2016 and the Pro- serve as a safety value, and disregard probation spects for an End to Mass Incarceration,” Mal- as having any significant role in the correctional colm C. Young, an attorney experienced in system. criminal justice sentencing and reentry pro- Perhaps the most disturbing report grams, determined that “from 2010 to 2016, the released in the late spring of 2018 was by the number of state and federal prisoners de- Bureau of Justice Statistics. This report, enti- creased on average each year by 0.9%.” More- tled “2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9- over, he found that “in the three most recent Year Follow-up Period (2005-2014)” was issued years, 2014 to 2016, the rate of decrease accel- on May 23, 2018. This report studied 401,288 erated slightly, to about 1.4%.” Thus Young state prisoners released in 2005. This report concluded that “even if this higher rate is sus- found that of this group released in 2005, there tained, prisons in the United States will hold were 1,994,000 arrests during the 9-year peri- more than 1 million prisoners for another 25 od, an average of 5 arrests per released prison- years, until 2043, and the current prison popula- er. Moreover, this report stated that sixty per- tion will be reduced to half its current size, a cent of these arrests occurred during years 4 goal of leading advocates, by 2068, fifty years through 9. The report estimated that 68% of from now.” released prisoners were arrested within 3 years, In Texas, the prospects of reducing the 79% within 6 years, and 83% within 9 years. In prison population appears to be diminishing. addition, this report found that almost half (47%) Since 2010, Texas decreased its prison popula- of prisoners who did not have an arrest within 3 tion by 6,749 (4.1 percent). However these years of release were arrested during years 4 numbers have been leveling over the last sever- through 9. al years. If one examines the Texas Depart- This report reinforces a finding of the Executive ment of Criminal Justice’s Statistical Report for Office of the President of the United States in the last three fiscal years, one will see that there April 2016. In a paper entitled “Economic Per- has been no discernable change in the “total on spectives on Incarceration and the Criminal Jus- hand” number of inmates confined within the tice System” the White House examine existing TDCJ system. In the FY 2016 Statistical Re- criminal justice policy in the United States from port, there were 147,053 total inmates on hand an economic standpoint. This paper looked at on August 31, 2016; for FY 2017, there were the economic benefits and disadvantages of the existing system and what economic benefits

might arise if there were changes to our criminal zero to 0.5 percent decrease in arrest rates and justice policy. This report made some surprising 2) emerging research finds that longer spells of observations and findings. Perhaps the strong- incarceration increase recidivism, that each ad- est argument in favor of incarceration is to inca- ditional sanction year causes an average in- pacitate criminal offenders. It stands to reason crease in future offending of 4 to 7 percentage points. Finally, although crime rates have that if a criminal is locked-up he or she cannot dropped markedly over the last thirty years, this be free of victimize innocent people in the free paper states that a large body of economic re- world. Thus, the cost of incarceration, including search shows that incarceration has only a long term confinement must be compared to the small impact on crime reduction, and that this cost of crime and victimization. Indeed, this pa- impact diminishes as the incarcerated popula- per recognized that the criminal justice system tion grows. Thus, we are faced with the predica- has clear benefits: the total social cost of crime ment that no only will long term incarceration in America likely totals hundreds of billions of not have a significant impact on the rate of dollars each year, and the criminal justice sys- crime but it will actually increase crime rates in local communities. tem plays an important role in reducing crime Another report of great interest was is- and maintaining the safety of citizens. sued by the Council of State Governments Jus- The problem, as this White House paper tice Center in June 2019. In “Confined and notes, is that “there is significant churn in the Costly: How Supervision Violations Are Filling incarcerated population, with over 600,000 pris- Prisons and Burdening Budgets” this report oners released each year.” This report further found that across the country, 45% of state pris- notes that “though time served in prison has in- on admissions are due to violations of probation creased, most prisoners can expect to spend or parole for new offenses or technical viola- less than five years in prison for a single crime tions. 11% of all probation revocations were for technical reasons and 14% of all parole revoca- and short-to-medium length spells of incarcera- tions were for technical violations. This report tion lead to the release of more than a quarter further stated that in 20 states, more than one of the incarcerated population annually.” Thus, half of the prison admissions are due to supervi- no matter how much we may want to rely on in- sion violations. Thus, much of existing criminal capacitation to deter crime, it is not economical- justice policy is to recycle offenders in and out ly sustainable and each year large number of of prison with no real positive outcomes. inmates will continue to be released and flood The numbers in Texas show that over local communities, especially those that are the last thirty years there has been an increase in the number of technical probation revoca- economically and socially distressed. tions. In the early 2000s the then Executive Di- Moreover, this paper makes two remark- rector of the Texas Department of Criminal Jus- able assertions: 1) economic research suggests tice (TDCJ) sent a survey to all the local adult that longer sentence lengths have little deterrent probation departments in Texas regarding the impact on offenders, that a 10 percent increase rising trend in technical violations were 55 in average sentence length corresponds to a

percent of all revocation. In its report on fidence in the efficacy of probation as a mean- revocations to prison for fiscal year 2018, the ingful alternative to incarceration. Part of this is Community Justice Assistance Division (a divi- due to timing, by the mid-1970s the tide had sion of TDCJ and the successor organization of turned away from hopeful rehabilitation ap- the Texas Adult Probation Commission) stated proaches to relying on greater incarceration to serve if not as a deterrence, then to incapacitate that slightly more than one-half (50.9 percent) of the offender and remove the individual for as all felony revocations were for technical reasons long as possible from society. Thus, advocates only. of community corrections were on the defensive When one looks at the data for probation for most of this period. However, the other rea- revocation rates over the last several years, the son was that advocates of community correc- rates are remarkably stable. In FY 2012 the tions suffered a loss of confidence in the poten- statewide revocation rate for felonies was tial of community corrections serving as an al- 10.47% and for misdemeanors 14.8%; in FY ternative to incarceration. At any conference for practitioners of 2013, the statewide revocation rate for felonies probation and parole, the constant mantras was 11.1% and for misdemeanors 15.1%; in FY have been “Martinson” and “Nothing Works.” 2014, the statewide revocation rate for felonies Robert Martinson was a gifted and idealistic was 11.2% and for misdemeanors 15.3%; in FY criminologist who wrote a highly influential book 2015, the statewide revocation rate for felonies entitled The Effectiveness of Correctional Treat- was 10.9% and for misdemeanors 14.8%; in FY ment: A Survey of Treatment Evaluation Stud- 2016, the statewide revocation rate for felonies ies. Martinson reviewed a large body of re- was 10.9% and for misdemeanors 15.4%; in FY search on rehabilitative programs in a prison 2017, the statewide revocation rate for felonies setting. His conclusion was that “nothing was 11.2% and for misdemeanors 15.6%; and works.” This conclusion was seized upon by policy makers and advocates to make the case in FY 2018, the statewide revocation rate for that incarceration of criminals in large numbers felonies was 11.2% and for misdemeanors and for long periods of time was the best ap- 15.0%. Thus, despite thirty years of reform ef- proach to solving crime in American society. forts in Texas and uncounted money poured in- However, the irony was that Martinson argu- to the criminal justice system, primarily to pris- ment was against “prison reform,” not rehabilita- ons, the rates are no better and outcome are tion programs in the community. His goal was event worse. This is to be expected when the to reduce reliance on prisons, not increase its only approach to community corrections is to reliance. How practitioners of community cor- rections came to the conclusion that Martinson’s add another hammer to the tool box. findings applied to them and accepted this criti- How Did We Get into this Predicament? cism wholeheartedly remains one of the great For as long as this writer has been in- mysteries in community corrections. There have been efforts to reform com- volved in community corrections, which is now munity corrections over the last several over thirty years, there has been a crisis of con- 47

decades but for a number of reasons, these ef- taught how to score them but generally taught forts have fallen short. The major steps to en- nothing else. Concerns regarding how does hance community corrections have been one develop a meaningful supervision plan; how through the development of risk/needs assess- does one appropriately interact with a proba- ment instruments, adoption of evidence-based tioner during an office visit; what resources are practices, utilization of behavioral/cognitive ther- available to address any of the identified crimi- apy and the use of motivational interviewing. nogenic domains are never considered. More Each of these strategies of community supervi- important, there is an assumption that a lay per- sion have valid scientific research to support son, i.e., a supervision officer is qualified to ad- their use. However, the problems are that these minister a risk/needs assessment, engage in methods of supervision are too narrow in ap- cognitive/behavioral therapy, understand and proach, that they are generally misunderstood implement evidence-based practices, etc. with by practitioners of community corrections and no formal training. too often badly implemented. The other problem may be less apparent Take the development and use of risk assess- but is more serious. Generally, in its most re- ment instruments. The use of assessments in- cent evolution, risk/needs assessment instru- struments is one of the earliest tools in modern ments focus on eight domains: corrections. Risk assessments were first widely 1) A History of Antisocial Behavior; used in the early 1970s and were first used by 2) Antisocial Personality Patterns; California’s state probation offices, by the Unit- 3) Antisocial Cognition; ed State’s Parole Commission and in separate 4) Antisocial Associates; United States District Probation Offices. Alt- 5) Family/Marital Circumstances; hough these assessments were originally de- 6) School/Work; signed to be clinical in nature, these clinical as- 7) Leisure/Recreation; and sessments proved to be too difficult for a layper- 8) Substance Abuse. son to administer and later assessment instru- ment were actuarial and deemed more accu- The first four of these domains are often rate. These instruments were adopted widely in referred to as the Big Four as having the great- the country and used in all aspects of criminal est impact on recidivism and the second four as justice, from correctional institutions, primarily to the Moderate Four as having a slightly less, but classify inmates based on safety concerns and still impactful relationship with future criminal the likelihood of the commission of rules infrac- behavior. tions to probation and parole supervision, pri- By the very nature of the criminogenic marily to gauge for risk of reoffending and likeli- domains it is far easier for an officer to address hood to violate conditions of supervision. the moderate four than the big four. An officer Herein lies the problem. At least in Tex- as officers who are not trained professionals in can make inquiry regarding family or marital cir- administering assessment instrument, are cumstances, employment issues, leisure