Board of Commissioners

AGENDA ITEM REPORT

Subject: Review 2024 Hubbard County/DOC Comprehensive Plan

Meeting: Board of Commissioners - 02 Apr 2024
Department: Administration
Staff Contact: Jeff Cadwell, County Administrator

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
2024 Hubbard County/DOC comprehensive plan. Last year the State of MN changed the way that
probation funding was distributed. Along with the change in funding, there was also a requirement
that each entity create a Comprehensive Plan and a Corrections Advisory Board to review the plan.
Following the review and approval of the Advisory Board, the plan is to be submitted to the County
Board for review and acceptance. The Advisory Board met last week for well over an hour and we
had a great discussion about the probation delivery system in Hubbard County. There were a few
small updates made to the plan as suggested by the advisory board and the updated plan is now
being submitted for County Board approval.

In Minnesota, probation services are provided under 3 models. The Community Corrections Act
model, The Department of Corrections/County Probation Office model, and the Department of
Corrections/Department of Corrections contract model. Hubbard County utilizes the DOC/DOC
contract model. This model makes sense for a number of smaller counties as it is very efficient and
cost-effective. Under this model, the State pays for the cost of felony supervision and the county
pays for the cost of supervising Gross Misdemeanor, Misdemeanor, and Juvenile cases. The state
then reimburses the County for 50% of those costs. This year the State allocated $137,000 as a
base funding amount for each county. Hubbard County is currently paying for 1 agent position and
.5 of a support staff position. The agent position billed is split between two agents, so .5 for each
agent. For the current fiscal year, Hubbard County received $115, 631 from the State as CPO
reimbursement for correctional services. The State then invoices Hubbard County for $155,036 for
the cost of services in FY23. The cost to the county is $39,405.

Hubbard County has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of arrests and court filings in
the recent past. This has created challenges for all agencies to process the increased workload. I
have been very impressed with our office's ability to adjust to these demands. Our numbers
increased from 269 adults under probationary supervision in 2020 to 487 in 2022. In addition to
these clients, we are also supervising an average of 20 juvenile clients and 40 supervised
release(clients released from prison) clients in Hubbard County. This increase has created a ton of
extra work for the agents. Thankfully, all of them have stepped up and met this challenge head-on.
Within the last few weeks, we were approved to hire another .5 position to assist and try to create
manageable caseloads. If the numbers remain high, I may be back asking the County for approval
to approve another .5 agent. Over the next year, we hope to work with our criminal justice partners
to promote and acquire more services in Hubbard County that are specific to mental health and
addiction.
The formation of a Corrections Advisory Board as a standing Hubbard County Committee is
requested.

RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the 2024 Hubbard County/DOC comprehensive plan as presented, and authorize the
creation of a Corrections Advisory Board.

ATTACHED DOCUMENTS:
Hubbard Comp Plan (002)

Page 2 of 32
 Hubbard County
Comprehensive Plan
February 12, 2024

Page 3 of 32
Contents
Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1
Administration and Organization of Correctional Services ..........................................................................1
District Organization Chart ...........................................................................................................................2
Advisory Board .............................................................................................................................................3
DOC Training Requirements: ........................................................................................................................3
Overview of Supervision Population ............................................................................................................3
Strategic Planning at the State Level ............................................................................................................4
Use of Evidenced Based Practices with fidelity: (Normative Feedback)...................................................4
Council of State Governments (CSG)- Justice Reinvestment Initiative .....................................................4
Strategic Planning at the Local Level ............................................................................................................5
Pre-Trial, Diversion and Other Services ........................................................................................................5
Narrative of Core Interventions and Evidence-based Practices (EBP)..........................................................6
Victim Concerns..........................................................................................................................................11
Correctional Fees........................................................................................................................................11
Contracted Services and Proposal and Proposals for New Services...........................................................12
STS Contract............................................................................................................................................12
Budget ........................................................................................................................................................12
Highlights....................................................................................................................................................13
Appendix A Training Requirements ............................................................................................................15
Appendix B Pre Trial-Standards ..................................................................................................................16
Appendix C Overview of Supervision Population .......................................................................................21

Page 4 of 32
Introduction
Race and Hispanic Origin Hubbard
White alone, percent 93.70%
Black or African American alone, percent(a) 0.60%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent(a) 2.70%
Asian alone, percent(a) 0.50%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent(a) 0.10%
Two or More Races, percent 2.40%
Hispanic or Latino, percent(b) 2.90%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent 91.70%

Geography
Population per square mile, 2020 23
Land area in square miles, 2020 926.01
FIPS Code 27057

Administration and Organization of Correctional Services

DOC Vision DOC Mission

Achieving justice through promotion of racial Transforming lives for a safer Minnesota
equity, restoration from harm, and
community connectedness

Page 5 of 32
District Organization Chart

The Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) provides felony and supervised release supervision in
51 of the 87 Minnesota counties, and in 30 of those counties, the DOC also provides juvenile, and
misdemeanor sentenced supervision. On any given day there are approximately 20,000 persons under
probation and supervised release supervision. In addition, the DOC provides Intensive Supervised
Release (ISR) supervision in 75 of the 87 counties for those persons that are released from prison with
the highest level of risk for repeat sexual and violent offenses. The DOC also provides supervision in 82
of our 87 counties for those persons released from prison early to serve their time in the community
after participating in the DOC Challenge Incarceration Program (CIP). Lastly, the DOC operates 21
Sentence to Service (STS) crews across the state.

Name: Title:

Mark Smith District Supervisor

Kayla Simon Corrections Agent
Jim Kanten Corrections Agent Career
Joe Peterson Corrections Agent Career
Tabitha Schacht Corrections Agent Career
Aaron Schueller Corrections Agent Career
Pam Kaseman Office & Admin Specialist Int

Page 6 of 32
The Hubbard County Probation Office is responsible for supervision and case management for all clients,
adult and juvenile who reside within the county and are placed on felony, misdemeanor, and gross
misdemeanor supervision by the Court. The Hubbard County Probation Office is also responsible to
provide Pre-Plea Worksheets, Pre-Sentence Investigations and Pre-Dispositional Investigations reports
to the Court and as of February 23, 2015, began doing Pre-Trial Bail Evaluations per statutory
requirements. In addition, the Hubbard County Probation Office is responsible for supervision
individuals who are released from adult correctional facilities on supervised release (parole) who reside
in Hubbard County. The MN DOC also provides Intensive Supervised Release Supervision in Hubbard
County for the highest risk individuals who are released from prison.

The Hubbard County Probation Office operates through a contract between the MN Department of
Corrections and Hubbard County. This office is equipped, staffed, and supervised by the Minnesota
Department of Corrections. The MN DOC rents office space from Hubbard County to be housed in the
Court area. The District Supervisor administers the department budget for 01-270 (Probation & Parole).
It should be noted that in May 2023, the legislature passed a new funding formula allowing for state
reimbursement to counties based on the number of clients supervised with a capitated rate per client
supervised. Currently, Hubbard County is billed for 50% of two agents and 50% of one support staff. The
50/50 split of two agents was done to keep costs for the county down as well as equitably address the
number of felony, M/GM and juvenile clients under supervision.

Advisory Board
The Honorable Robert Tiffany-Hubbard County Judge
Jonathon Frieden-Hubbard County Attorney
Cory Aukes-Hubbard County Sheriff
Ted Van Kempen-Hubbard County Commissioner
Jeff Cadwell-Hubbard County Administrator
Jodi Moyer-Managing Attorney Ninth Judicial District Public Defender’s Office

DOC Training Requirements:

Agents new to the DOC participate in a Statewide Training (STA) Academy. STA is spread out over three
months, is hybrid in nature (courses in person & virtual platform) and consists of over 140 hours of
instruction on evidence best practices (EBP) and how to effectively work with persons under supervision
to assess and reduce their probability for future criminality, agent safety, as well as other general
knowledge courses. Agents are required to complete 40 hours of training each year; 20 of which are to
be EBP related. STS crew leaders are required to complete 40 hours of training, which includes an
annual two-day Advanced Crew Leader training at Camp Ripley with instruction on chainsaws, tree
felling, small engine repair, safety, and best approaches to working with clients and stakeholders.
Support staff are required to complete 16 hours of training relevant to their position. See the FY 24
required training for Field Services in Appendix A.

Overview of Supervision Population

See Appendix C

Page 7 of 32
Strategic Planning at the State Level
Each county may have goals addressing specific needs in their community. As an agency, Field Services’
main approach to transforming lives is targeting the drivers of criminality and providing interventions to
address those needs to lower that person’s level of risk for criminality. As with most agencies, it is not
just knowing what those strategies are, but who to prioritize for resources and how to effectively
implement those strategies with high fidelity within an organization that leads to greater success.

Use of Evidenced Based Practices with fidelity: (Normative Feedback)

All DOC Supervisors attended the Alliance for Community and Justice Innovation (ACJI’s)
Implementation Leadership Academy on best approaches to implementation and sustaining culture
change and will continue with coaching from ACJI. For all DOC counties, one of the main objectives is to
continue to ensure that staff are using evidenced best practices with fidelity. In fiscal year 2024, all DOC
counties will be ensuring that staff review the risk assessment results with the person being assessed.
(Normative Feedback). This helps the person under supervision have a better understanding of
behaviors and thinking that place them at risk for ongoing criminality.
• At a local level, training is on-going in this area. We have focused on the process of Normative
Feedback using a Normative Feedback chronological entry that seeks to memorialize the key
elements of the process. This entry also serves as an on-going case planning process between
the agent and the client. Over the next year, the agents will be tasked with expanding the case
planning process through training and skill practice.

Council of State Governments (CSG)- Justice Reinvestment Initiative

All three MN delivery systems have partnered together and are currently receiving technical assistance
from CSG and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) to continue to implement the recommendations for
MN made by CSG after assessing the state’s supervision procedures through the Justice Reinvestment
Initiative. Legislatively, an oversight body, the Community Services Advisory Council (CSAC), was created
with specific goals. That oversight group will provide both direction and approve recommendations from
various statewide workgroups. Technical assistance was awarded to all 3 delivery systems to implement
a statewide Risk/Needs Assessment tool. A workgroup was formed for this initiative and is actively
working to implement one tool within the next year. All delivery systems have agreed to move forward
with using the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI) as MN’s risk and needs tool. The
workgroup is currently working to create a “Request for Proposal” for outside parties to submit interest
in validating this tool for the state of MN. Once validated, MN will utilize this tool to determine risk and
need areas and level of supervision for justice-involved adults. Additional tools may also be utilized for
offense specific cases and other responsivity areas.

There is also a Phase II workgroup that is designated to assist in the implementation of many of CSG’s
original recommendations. Initially, this group is looking at creating a single standard of supervision for
MN, regardless of what county/agency a client is supervised in. Additionally, implementation of a
statewide behavior modification tool or incentives/sanctions grid, is being considered.

CSG is also aiding Minnesota in development of statewide supervision outcome data. A statewide data
committee has been established to create statewide outcomes that are able to measure supervision
success and return on investment. The committee has worked with CSG staff to identify outcomes that
impact success, such as housing or mental health rates, the percent of persons under supervision that

Page 8 of 32
are successfully completing cognitive behavior or other treatment services to address their pathways to
criminality, and data on recidivism, violation rates, and percent of those who successfully completed
required conditions of supervision. The committee is currently working on where the data is located, the
ability to gather data statewide and standards on data input for each agency to follow.

Lastly ISR Transformation has been focused on supervision standards across all ISR agencies where the
supervision is structured at an individual level rather than a “program”. The purpose of ISR
Transformation is to develop standards and guidelines for the administration of ISR that increases
success (desistance), enhances equity, and appropriately balances the need for public safety with
person-centered approaches. ISR Transformation is currently working on implementing the changes
established by the working group in CY 2024.

Strategic Planning at the Local Level

The Minnesota Department of Corrections operating in Hubbard County seeks to hold clients
accountable while offering opportunities for change. Restoring justice for victims and contributing to a
safer Minnesota is another key component to supervision. Specifically, the MN Department of
Corrections in Hubbard County works with the Judges, Court Administration, Law Enforcement, County
Attorney’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, Hubbard County Human Services, and community
stakeholders to continue advancing priority initiatives during 2024. These priority initiatives would
include the advancement of additional chemical use counseling and mental health services in the
County. Specifically, local providers who can work hand in hand with our office to encourage and
promote engagement in these services. This office further seeks to clarify job duties to better serve the
juvenile population.

Pre-Trial, Diversion and Other Services

Pretrial standards based on best practices focus on maximizing court appearances and providing referral
for services, rather than release condition compliance. Please see Pre Trial-Best Practices in Appendix B

▪ Currently the Court will place select clients on pre-trial supervision with our office. The client is
assigned to an agent who will try to meet with the client to review pre-trial conditions of release
and conduct UA(urinalysis test that looks for controlled substances and alcohol) tests, if directed
by the Court. There has been interest in expanding this program and a clear outline of pre-trial
best practices is attached in Appendix B. Pre-trial programs that are run correctly should be a
benefit to the client, the Court and the entire Criminal Justice system. Our local office would be
in support expanding pre-trial services through additional local funding.
▪ When the Court orders a Pre-Sentence investigation (PSI), we assign the report to an agent via
rotation and based on area of the county where the client resides. Many times, the Court
directs the client to report directly to our office, which is very much appreciated as it assists in
getting accurate and up to date contact information. Victim contact is included in this process to
whatever extent the victim prefers. Additional collateral contacts are used to provide the Court
with information needed to make the most informed decisions possible. A similar process is
followed for juvenile Pre-Disposition Reports (PDI). The completed PSI/PDI is filed with the
Court in accordance with Court rules. Hubbard County has been utilizing the services of a
contract PSI writer for the past year. The DOC has authorized the hiring of a 0.5 agent position.
This position will assist with the PSI workload and create more time for the agents to do
intervention work with their clients.

Page 9 of 32
 ▪ Pre-Plea Worksheet prepared in 2022 and 2023.

▪ Pre-Sentence Investigations prepared in 2022 and 2023

Narrative of Core Interventions and Evidence-based Practices (EBP)

The DOC uses risk, need, and responsivity principles for effective case management that adhere to the
following:

The DOC Key Supervision Principles:

• Use of validated risk needs and responsivity assessment tools that are validated and
evaluated for disparities. Primary assessment tools are LS/CMI and Youth Level of
Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) as the overall tool for most persons under
supervision. For sex-specific crimes, the DOC uses the Static 99 and Stable, and the DOC
MNSTARR 2.0 for risk on supervised releasees from a MN Correctional Facility. Field Services’
policy is to have the assessment completed within 30 days of the person being placed under

Page 10 of 32
 supervision and reassessed annually for adults and every six months for juveniles. The CSAC has
prioritized validation of the LS/CMI tool for MN’s justice-involved population in 2024.
o All agents have been trained to proficiency in the assessment tools specific to their
caseloads. Supervision levels are established based on the clients’ score; however,
agents frequently adjust supervision to accommodate the day to day struggles that they
client’s encounter and increase the level of support/contact based on observable risk.
Working with clients to avoid further crisis or criminal activity promotes a stronger
working relationship with the client as well as lowering the risk to the public.
• Supervision intensity and case management contacts vary based on level of risk per normed
cut off scores. Interventions are most effective in reducing recidivism when they match a
person’s assessed level of risk. The focus of supervision should be on moderate, moderate-high,
and high-risk persons. Contacts include office, home, and virtual contacts. Low risk persons
should receive support and assistance in completion of conditions that do not require a
supervision agent to perform.
o At a local level, the LSCMI is used to determine risk/supervision level. There is
continued work to tie the criminogenic need along with case management services for
the client (Normative Feedback and case planning process). Agents work at developing
an alliance with the client to better address the ongoing stressors that face the client
daily. Through this alliance, clients are more likely to work towards interventions and
programming to address needs.
• Adherence to general responsivity and providing cognitive behavior interventions. Agents use
core correctional practices, motivational interviewing, and skill directed interventions that
include modeling, practice, and homework. All DOC agents are trained and provided electronic
Carey Guides and 170 agents have Tools on Devices.
o The National Institute of Corrections notes that justice involved clients who are
moderate to high risk and complete cognitive behavioral programming can potentially
reduce their recidivism by 30%. At a local level, all agents have been trained and are
proficient in the use of motivational interviewing. Implementation of Carey Guides has
been a struggle due to some local technological struggles. The format for the Carey
Guides is electronic and many of our clients don’t have internet access that allow for
this to happen. A second hurdle is the caseload sizes have prohibited agent time to
become fully familiar with the electronic process. Hubbard County partners with the
Legacy Group to offer virtual Interpersonal Violence Group (this is required by statute
5188.02) in most domestic type offenses. A DOC agent assists in the facilitation of this
group. The Legacy Group also offers Core Cognitive Group on a virtual platform, and we
have had a few clients take part in this option. In the last year. For those clients looking
for another option, the Northwest Indian Community Development Center (NWICDC)
also offers domestic violence classes for free if the client agrees to enter a service
agreement with them. DOC agents have partnered with Leech Lake counselors to begin
offering Moving On (female cognitive skills curriculum) and Decision Points (cognitive
skills curriculum). Both programs are supported by best practices.
o Local supervision of juveniles. Hubbard County has one Agent assigned to handle
juvenile supervision. This Agent attends all juvenile court hearings, from initial
appearance to sentencing. In some instances, juveniles are placed on pre-trial

Page 11 of 32
 supervision. Supervision services typically start with a Certification Study, Extended
Jurisdiction Juvenile (EJJ) study, and/or a Pre-Disposition Investigation (PDI). In 2022, 19
PDI/EJJ/Certification studies where completed. In 2023, 9 PDI’s where completed. So
far, in 2024, 12 PDI/EJJ/Certification studies have been ordered. Whenever practical,
we try to encourage sentencing recommendations of Stay of Adjudication to provide
juveniles the opportunity to keep the criminal offenses off their record. When the
juvenile is placed on supervised probation, our Agent works with the juvenile and the
juvenile’s family to assist them in following through with their probation conditions and
connecting them to the needed service within the community to address their
risk/needs. Supervision includes partnering with the schools, mental health providers,
chemical health providers, and Hubbard County Social Service, and any other need
agency to ensure the juvenile’s needs are being met. Our Agent works hard to promote
interagency collaboration and to engage community stakeholders to better serve
juveniles involved in the justice system. As such, she is involved in multiple groups, like
Hubbard in Prevention, a monthly Juvenile Collaborative meeting with social services,
and a Juvenile Agent group she has just started. Hubbard County is also a member
county of Northwestern MN Juvenile Center, as such, the District Supervisor attends
board meetings along with County Commissioners Van Kempen and Keranen.
o Local supervision of sex offenders: The MN DOC has one agent whose primary caseload
is dedicated to individuals who have committed felony level sex offenses. These agents
supervise approximately 28 clients within the community. The responsibility of this
agent is to ensure compliance with conditions ordered as part of a client’s probation or
supervised release and provide clients opportunity for change while at the same time
addressing public safety concerns. Agents work in collaboration with multiple agencies
that provide a variety of services to help facilitate this change and promote public
safety. Much of an agent’s time is spent in the community monitoring client behavior
by conducting unannounced home/field visits. During these visits, agents have contact
with not only clients, but also family members, employers, and other community
members who interact with the client. This helps in assessing the progress of a client
and addressing any possible concerns. The DOC partners with CORE Professional
Services to provide sex offender treatment groups for clients directed to complete this
requirement as part of their conditions. Agents participate in the treatment process
with the provider to enhance supervision. Their role is to monitor how clients are
progressing in treatment, identify high risk situations to better manage their case,
approve/disapprove safe plans that are presented for activities clients want to do in the
community, assess and make recommendations to treatment about the suitability of
family members/friends to supervise offender’s contact with minors, and have input
into the work they have presented in treatment. Agents also attend weekly staffing’s
with the treatment provider so that any concerns with a particular client can be
addressed.
o In addition to the above, agents work with several other agencies in Hubbard County and
throughout the state that help provide services/monitoring for sex offenders. The following is
a list of some of the some of those duties:

Page 12 of 32
 ▪ Work with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to keep clients in
compliance with Predatory Offender Registration requirements and
communicate with local law enforcement during quarterly residence checks that
are required by statute.
▪ Provide evidence to law enforcement when illegal material is observed on
offender’s electronic devices.
▪ Participate in county-wide checks in collaboration with law enforcement to
ensure clients are abiding by probation/supervised release conditions, and also
pursue any outstanding warrants.
▪ Make mandated reports required by statute to Hubbard County Health and
Human Services when a predatory offender will be residing with a minor, and
coordinate with child protection on an appropriate level of
contact/supervision/safe planning.
▪ Collaborate with the Department of Corrections, Hubbard County Victim’s
Services, and Support Within Reach to meet with victims to provide information
during the court process and answer any questions they may have during
supervision.
▪ Provide training to agencies within the county regarding agent’s role in the
investigation/supervision of sexual offenders.
▪ Attend bi-monthly meetings with other sex offender agents from the district
and throughout the state to discuss issues as it relates to the supervision of
sexual offenders and to discuss individual cases to help manage a particular
case.

• Addressing specific responsivity such as mental health, housing, gender, and culturally specific
services. The Minnesota Department of Corrections supports housing first initiatives and
collaboration for addressing mental health needs, gender specific interventions that target
unique pathways into the justice system and working with Tribal Nations on supervision and
intervention partnerships. The DOC has four full time staff that help work with persons and
communities around housing needs. DOC supervisors and staff that work closely with our Tribal
Nations participated in Tribal Relations training offered by the University of Minnesota in this
last year and DOC has started to track tribal affiliation in our data management system for
future gap analysis of programming needs.

• Local collaboration with Tribal Nations and programs.

o Over the past year, efforts towards collaboration have continued to increase. Examples
of this are the White Earth assistant tribal probation agent project. This is allowing
Native staff to partner with a MN DOC agent to work within local communities to
increase cultural understanding and reduce the number of violations in tribal
communities. Locally, the DOC has partnered with Leech Lake in the co-facilitation of 2
cognitive skills programs (Moving On and Decision Points). In addition, we are working
with the Northwest Indian Community Development Center to provide better services
for our Native clients returning from prison. The Healing House, which is in Bemidji,
provides a safe place for Native women returning to the local community. They are
provided clothing, housing, and services to assist them in reuniting with their children
and finding a safe place to live.

Page 13 of 32
 o The DOC is partnering with Leech Lake with the development of a shelter care program
in hopes to keep some children from being placed outside of their local reservation.
Additionally, we have been working to identify spiritual advisors who can assist our local
jails in setting ups services for the Native population. We continue to engage our tribal
partners in developing best practices around supervision of Native American clients and
addressing specific needs.
o Transportation is a major barrier in Hubbard County. As such, Agents are encouraged to
meet with clients a various location throughout the county and on the Leech Lake
reservation. Being able to see clients in their homes and local communities removes a
major barrier and serves to assist in building relationships.
• Caseload sizes for supervision intensity should be capped based on normed supervision and
task workload studies. Minnesota Department of Corrections uses supervision workload points
tracked in CSTS to manage caseload sizes.
o As noted earlier, caseload numbers in Hubbard County continue to be very high. On
average each agent has over 100 clients they supervise. Of concern, agents are
spending most of their time completing documents for the Court. This takes time away
from supervising and working with the clients in the community to make sure they are
complying with directives of the Court and staying healthy. We are discussing options to
free up more time for agents to spend with clients. One of these efforts is our office
contracting with a PSI writer to assist agents. A part-time agent position has been
approved and will assist with managing the overwhelming task responsibilities.
• Early discharge should focus on intervention dosage and not just completion of conditions.
The DOC along with Dodge & Olmsted County are partnering with National Institute of
Corrections, Center for Effective Public Policy and the Carey Group on a readiness assessment
and implementation of Dosage probation. This promising practice focuses on prescribed
intervention hours that target clients’ highest criminogenic need areas which is “dosed”
according to the client’s risk level. Successful completion of hours results in the client’s
discharge from probation.
o DOC will continue to work with the criminal justice stakeholders to explore best
practices around early discharges.
• The focus of supervision is skill development. While supervision focuses on conditions, agents
work with clients in developing new skills to avoid future recidivism is the key to long term
success.
o At a local level, the agents continue to work with clients to develop a working rapport
that encourages positive choices. This area will also expand as agents continue to work
through the case planning process.
• Use of incentives and adherence to the 4 to 1 positive ratios. Agents are trained in using
reinforcements which have proven to be more effective in supporting behavior changes than
the use of punishment.
o Agents are trained using Core Correctional Practices which has provided agents the skills
to apply incentives through supervision. There is no current documents practice that
has been implemented and agents continue to utilize positive reinforcement as the
primary means to deliver incentives.

10

Page 14 of 32
 • Utilize community-based interventions compared to the reliance on out of home placements
including incarceration for technical violations. Programming and services in one’s local
community should be exhausted prior to recommending revocation.
o In 2023, the Department of Corrections funded a 45-day intervention center at the
Northeast Regional Correctional Center (NERCC) for supervised release clients who are
classified as high and very high risk and who are at risk for revocation to prison for
technical violations. These clients are required to comply with applicable programming,
assessments or education dependent on their risk and needs. Hubbard County is
eligible to refer clients to this resource which is at no cost to the county.

o The DOC continues to work with local partners to advocate for more local resources for
our clients. As a local community we need to insist that we create additional
programming to assist those struggling with addiction and mental health issues prior to
them entering the criminal justice system. For those involved, we need treatment
options and collaboration.

Victim Concerns
By statute, the County Attorney’s office is required to notify victims of their rights, including restitution
and victim impact statements. The victim/witness coordinator files any restitution requests or victim
impacts with the court. Victims have many other rights that the Victim Services office must comply with
including notification of hearings, if requested, plea agreements, decisions not to charge and overall
input. Hubbard County Agents reach out to Victim Services on an almost daily basis for info when they
are completing a PSI, and in more serious cases, will get the victims contact information to speak with
them directly. Agents will meet with victims in specific cases and will keep them updated as requested.
Agents monitor restitution payments and will return clients to Court if they are not paying as directed.

Correctional Fees
▪ The DOC stopped imposing supervision fees in late 2022. All DOC supervision fees collected
were deposited in the state general fund so this will have little impact on the county.
▪ Hubbard County collects supervision fees in the amount of $200 for Gross Misdemeanor
convictions and $100 for Misdemeanor convictions. There is a mandate to sunset all supervision
fees by 2027.
▪ Supervision fees will no longer be collected beginning in 2027 due to a new legislation.
▪ The supervision fees collected were utilized to fund a direct line from the Jail to our office. This
provides agents the ability to interact with clients in the jail without disrupting jail staff or
routines. This has been very beneficial for completing in custody PSI’s.
▪ This money is used to reimburse the cost of a contract PSI writer and to purchase additional
technology for our office.

Fee Description 2022 Fees Imposed 2022 Fees Collected

County Supervision Fee 13,300.00 5,746.90
DOC Supervision Fee 36,480.00 7,306.12
Total 49,780.00 13,053.02

11

Page 15 of 32
Contracted Services and Proposal and Proposals for New Services
The Minnesota Department of Corrections covers all electronic monitoring costs for supervised release
clients through a contract with BI Incorporated. All counties, regardless of delivery system, have access
to the contract. Monitoring is generally established prior to the client’s release from the MN
Correctional Facility or through a violation hearing or restructure recommendation.

• Hubbard County has a contract with Midwest Monitoring to provide EHM services to local
clients.
• The MN DOC currently rents office space from Hubbard County and pays rent of $1412,50 per
month or $16,950. Currently we have some concerns that are being addressed such as no hot
water and only one functioning bathroom. It is my hope that when the county plans on doing
additional renovations or new construction that a new office space for us is included in that
plan. I am more than willing to collaborate on planning and in securing funding to make this
equitable for the county.

STS Contract
The MN DOC has a Joint Powers Agreement with Hubbard County to provide reimbursement for local
STS efforts. The STS program currently employs two full time staff: Kelly Deitchler and Joel Baker. The
reimbursement amount for two years is $32,806.20.
2023 Hubbard County STS projects:

• Blue Ox Grocery Store Clean out Project value: $4913

• Deep Lake Park Clean Up Project value: $3210
• Mantrap Conservation Club Project value $1375
• Park Rapids Area Chamber Project value $810
• Akeley Community Center Project value $4120

The crew is also responsible for the grounds’ maintenance for the Park Rapids and Nimrod DNR
offices. the DNR Parks and trails and maintenance and mowing at the public accesses.

12

Page 16 of 32
Budget
FTEs FY24 FY25 Total
Felony 5.04 $ 698,753.75 $ 730,197.66 $ 1,428,951.41
Agent 4.16 $ 505,072.14 $ 527,800.39 $ 1,032,872.53
CBB - Support 0.50 $ 44,467.87 $ 46,468.92 $ 90,936.79
Cost - CE $ 54,205.38 $ 56,644.62 $ 110,850.01
Cost - Interstate $ 20,224.76 $ 21,134.88 $ 41,359.64
Cost - Mgt-Admin $ 30,575.26 $ 31,951.14 $ 62,526.40
OAS Sr. 0.19 $ 14,031.73 $ 14,663.16 $ 28,694.90
Supervisor 0.19 $ 30,176.59 $ 31,534.54 $ 61,711.14
Non-Felony 1.70 $ 191,786.59 $ 200,416.98 $ 392,203.57
CBB - Agent 1.00 $ 112,505.12 $ 117,567.85 $ 230,072.96
CBB - Support 0.50 $ 44,467.87 $ 46,468.92 $ 90,936.79
Cost - Mgt-Admin $ 10,061.03 $ 10,513.78 $ 20,574.82
OAS Sr. 0.09 $ 6,646.61 $ 6,945.71 $ 13,592.32
Supervisor 0.11 $ 18,105.96 $ 18,920.72 $ 37,026.68
Grand Total 6.736 $ 890,540.33 $ 930,614.65 $ 1,821,154.98

For the current fiscal year, Hubbard County received $115, 631 from the State as CPO reimbursement
for correctional services. The State then invoices Hubbard County for $155,036 for the cost of services
in FY23. The cost to the county is $39,405.

Highlights
Over the past year, there have been several legislative changes that have significantly affected the
operations of probation and the Courts. One change was the probation cap legislation that was enacted
in 2023. This resulted in a 5-year cap on many sentences and a large volume of work for our office and
the courts to discharge clients who were past the 5-year cap. Secondly, the restoration of Voting Rights
legislation was also enacted and required our office to send out hundreds of letters to inform past
clients that their right to vote had been restored. Most significantly was the legislative funding formula
for counties. This resulted in a more equitable funding solution that was able to meet or exceed the
50% reimbursement that historically was unmet throughout the years. The new funding formula moved
from a reimbursement process to a direct allocation to the counties for county contract supervision.
Through all these changes, our office was still able to move forward in looking at new ways to better
serve our clients by providing services proven effective and supported by best practices. Over the next
year, we are looking to further implement the practice of Normative Feedback. We will continue to
collaborate with local partners to offer cognitive based groups like Moving On and Decision Points. As
noted earlier, this office would be in support of developing a Pre-Trial supervision program based on the
best practice outlined in Appendix B. Specifically, we would like to provide more services to those
charged with DWI’s and drug offenses. We are closely monitoring the numbers of clients on probation
with each agent, so we are able to provide needed services that focus on reducing recidivism. Court
filings in 2022 were 1302 and in 2023 there were 1041. Over the next year, we will see if there is any
correlation between this number and the number of clients placed on supervised probation. We are
excited about the formation of the Advisory Board and hope this serves to provide more insight into our
operations at a local level. Further information on supervision numbers is included in Appendix C.

13

Page 17 of 32
 14

Page 18 of 32
 Appendix A Training Requirements
Title Hours Applicability Description
Defensive Tactics 8 All DT trained Recertification for all staff previously trained in defensive tactics.
staff
Office Safety 3 All office staff Office safety training w/scenarios
(STS
discretionary)
EBP Trainings 20 All Agents 2 hrs of training for each of the following: Case Planning, MI, CCP, Carey
Guides, LSCMI/YLSCMI, formal/informal boosters, COPs
Staff will be required to obtain the remaining 10 hours through self-
learning opportunities and/or formal learning (literature review,
webinars, EBP Café videos, additional boosters, other training
opportunities). Staff can access EBP resource information:
https://mn.gov/doc/assets/Virtual%20EBP%20Options%204-
2023_tcm1089-572601.docx

Interstate Compact 2.5 All ICOTS 2.5 hours of refresher or advanced course regarding Adult Interstate
Users Compact
Trauma Informed Care 1-2 All Staff TBD
Intrastate 4 Agents Updated policy changes (Spring 2024)
Transfer/Release Planning
MNPAT 1 Staff who Release January 2024 (training Dec 2023)
complete Bail
Evaluations

The below will be discretionary training.

Title Hours Applicability Description

NARCAN 1 All staff carrying Naloxone training to administer
Narcan or requesting nasal spray in OD incidents.
to carry Review of Opioid exposure and
signs/symptoms
Chemical Irritant 1 All staff issued CI TBD-is this needed for re-cert
Mental Health Training TBD All staff who have TBD
contact with clients
Tribal State Relations Training TBD All agent staff who Culturally Specific Training
work with Tribal
Nations
Adverse Childhood Experience TBD Agent Staff Understanding the tool and what
Training (ACES) it means when working with
clients
Sovereign Citizen Training TBD Agent Staff Understanding the culture of
sovereign citizens and how to
work with this population

15

Page 19 of 32
Appendix B Pre Trial-Standards

Operationalized Mission
The DOC’s mission as it relates to pretrial monitoring is to enhance public safety through
evidence-based strategies that minimize re-arrest, ensure court appearance, and provide
support for released defendants.
Staff will be educated in best practices regarding pre-trial monitoring and will share this
knowledge with local stakeholders. It is strongly recommended that stakeholders meet and
regularly discuss the framework within which pretrial monitoring will occur as well as to discuss
responses to pretrial failures. Information pertaining to community safety issues regarding
pretrial monitoring should be discussed with stakeholders on an on-going basis.
Universal Screening
A designated risk assessment tool approved by Judicial Council will be completed on all offenses
required by Minnesota Statute 629.74, with encouragement for use on all assault related
misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses to include DANCO Violations. Court involved
stakeholders will be encouraged to utilize the risk assessment scores, in addition to other
information presented at the preliminary hearing, when making decisions regarding Release on
Recognizance, Pre-trial Monitoring or Remanding a defendant.
Validated Pre-Trial Risk Assessments
Once placed on pre-trial monitoring, the designated risk assessment tool approved by Judicial
Council will be used to determine level of supervision.
Sequential Bail Review
Process by which agents can target scheduled court hearings to address non-emergency
violations of pre-trial monitoring, progress reports or make a recommendation to the Court to
end pretrial monitoring in the community due to positive adjustment. Agents will not be
requesting any changes to monetary bail. Agents may also request adjustment regarding
conditions of supervision. Emergency issues will be addressed with the Court as needed.
Risk-Based Monitoring - Minimum Standards
Following a court order for pre-trial monitoring, a validated risk assessment as noted above will
be utilized to place defendants into one of three categories for pre-trial monitoring:
o Only the highest risk defendants, based on the validated risk assessment, will
receive formal pre-trial monitoring support. Low and Medium scores will result
in minimal interaction with corrections staff.

16

Page 20 of 32
 o Low & Medium: Contact with the defendant will occur as needed and necessary
to accomplish or assist in compliance with pre-trial monitoring conditions. These
levels will involve monitoring of conditions as ordered by the Court, such as
EHM, drug testing, and violations regarding new criminal behavior.
o Monitoring may take place electronically, by phone and/or virtually. Ideally, low
scoring defendants will not be placed on pre-trial monitoring to DOC.
o High: Contact with the defendant will occur a minimum of once per month.
Contact may be virtual and/or office visit. This level will involve monitoring of
conditions as ordered by the Court, such as EHM, drug testing, and violations
regarding new criminal behavior.
Focus for Contacts:

• Reminder of next Court date

• Update phone/address/employment information. Agent will remind client to contact
Court Administration with updated address. Agent will provide updated address
information to Court Administration as well.
• Inquire as to if they have had any new arrests/citations.
• Provide information around housing, employment and any other resources requested
by the client.
• Follow up with any court ordered obligations as appropriate (i.e., chemical and/or
mental health assessments, color wheel testing, etc.)
• Increase/decrease pre-trial monitoring in the community based on adjustment and/or
risk assessment.

Boundaries of Pre-Trial Monitoring:

• Absolutely no discussion regarding any details of their alleged criminal offense. All
defendants will be referred to their defense attorney for these types of discussions.
• Agents will not provide an opinion regarding plea agreements during the pre-trial
monitoring process.
• Agents MAY comment on cooperation regarding pre-trial monitoring.
• Court Reporting Process (violations/progress/discharges)
• Violation/Progress/Discharge reports will be filed as needed by the agent directly with
the Court for review and decision making. Copies will be served to the prosecuting
attorney and defense attorney.
• Performance Measurement and Feedback
• Percentage of pre-trial defendants who made all Court appearances (CSTS enhancement
is needed to track this information)
• Percentage of pre-trial defendants who remained compliant with Court conditions
during pre-trial monitoring (not to include re-arrest)

17

Page 21 of 32
 • Percentage of pre-trial defendants who remained law abiding during their pre-trial
monitoring.
• Validate the risk assessment tool approved by Judicial Council to target high risk
defendants for placement on pre-trial monitoring.
• Comparisons between districts regarding successes in each risk level category.
• Develop specialized training program for Pre-Trial Division with technical assistance
from the National Institute of Corrections (NIC).
https://nicic.gov/pretrial-justice-how-maximize-public-safety-court-appearance-and-release-
internet-broadcast

Best Practices Based on NIC Article Reviews

Pre-Trial Monitoring
Committee Findings: Studies were a bit dated with mixed results. Pre-Trial Monitoring did not
appear to impact re-arrest rates. Studies did not look at specific conditions when Pre-Trial
Monitoring was ordered.
Recommendations:

• Pre-Trial Monitoring should be used only in those cases scoring high risk on a validated
assessment tool.
• Pre-Trial Monitoring should be used to offer support services such as referrals for
mental health, chemical health, employment, housing, etc.
• Pre-Trial Monitoring conditions should be individualized to the defendant vs. having
blanket conditions for everyone.

Court Date Notification Systems

Committee Findings:
Court notification systems were found to significantly impact court appearance rates. It worked
best when specific information was provided, such as next court date, location of courthouse, &
consequences for non-appearance. Additionally, a notice sent following a missed court
appearance along with instructions as to how to resolve this issue, decreased the number of
warrants issued. Electronic notices (texts/voicemails/broadcast messaging) are good, but live
reminders are better and resulted in the defendant being twice as likely to show up for court.
This was the most well researched and effective intervention regarding court appearances.
Proven to save jail beds as well as minimize the impact to the defendant regarding
employment, housing, and family responsibilities.
Recommendations:

18

Page 22 of 32
 • Post information in lobby areas describing how to sign up for State Court Administration
e-court reminders.
• If placed on Pre-Trial Monitoring, assist defendant in setting up the e-reminders.

Pre-Trial Assessment Tools

Committee Findings: Pre-Trial assessment tools can improve outcomes and guide the
investment of resources. Implementation with fidelity as well as a process for quality assurance
is crucial. Assessment tools need to be validated on the populations they serve to ensure
minority communities are not negatively impacted and cut off scores are normed.

Recommendations:
Factors to review regarding validation of the Judicial Council approved assessment tool:

• Disparity regarding minority populations

• Cut off scores for low, medium, and high.
• AUC score
• Quality Assurance - annual booster trainings
Implementation –training staff on the validated assessment tool following approval of the tool
by Judicial Council.
Pre-Trial Detention
Committee Findings: Pre-Trial Detention should be reserved for serious/violent crimes.
Detaining low/moderate risk defendants can make them worse given they are likely to be
detained with higher risk individuals and defendant’s social supports are removed during this
time. When defendants are detained with bail, they are unable to pay, many plead guilty to get
out of jail. Defendants who were detained were more likely to experience the following
collateral consequences:

• Harsher and/or longer sentences.

• Increased likelihood of re-arrest long term – increased recidivism
Difficulties maintaining employment/housing.

• Recommendations:
Quality risk assessments provided to the Court can assist in judicial decision-making
regarding detention.
Pre-Trial Drug Testing
Committee Findings: Based on research from the 1980’s and 1990’s, there is no connection
between drug testing and pre-trial success and/or failure. Information regarding the specifics
of who was selected for drug testing is lacking. For example, was drug testing a blanket
condition or individualized to the defendant’s risk/need? There was a correlation between

19

Page 23 of 32
those that showed up for drug testing and court appearances. If defendants showed up for
drug testing, they also tended to show up for court. If defendants failed to show up for drug
testing, they also tended to not appear for court.

Various additional studies indicate a direct relationship between the use of illegal substances
and crime. Of particular note, is the high propensity for violence when individuals are under
the influence of opiates and/or methamphetamine.

Recommendations:

• Drug testing should be reserved for high-risk defendants.

• Drug testing should be individualized to target defendant’s risk/need and not used as a
blanket condition for pre-trial monitoring.
• Drug testing can improve outcomes for defendants when a positive relationship is built,
and pre-trial agents respond to positive test results in a supportive manner.
• Drug testing can serve as a support for defendants who choose to address their
chemical dependency issues.
Pre-Trial Location Monitoring (EHM)
Committee Findings: There is very little research on EHM at the pre-trial stage. Studies have
mixed outcomes and depending on which study you read, defendants on EHM are more, less,
or equally likely to appear for court and/or remain law abiding than those not placed on EHM.
Of further note, defendants placed on EHM had increased technical violations compared to
defendants not placed on EHM. Many of these technical violations were due to equipment
issues.
Recommendations:
Electronic Home Monitoring / Electronic Alcohol Monitoring should be reserved for high-risk
defendants unless otherwise statutorily required.

20

Page 24 of 32
 Appendix C Overview of Supervision Population
(INCLUDING SR, ISR and pre-trial)

Describe your agency’s supervision year-end population for calendar years (CY) 2020, 2021, and 2022 broken out as follows in table or graph form. Follow the
same instructions/parameters as you use for reporting on the annual probation survey.i
Page 25 of 32

o Pre-trial Population
*Pretrial Agent Tasks
2020 2020 Total 2021 2021 Total 2022 2022 Total Grand Total
Adult Hispanic Unknown Hispanic Unknown Hispanic Unknown
Female 76 76 57 57 149 149 282
Felony 57 57 39 39 126 126 222
Am Ind/Alaskan
Nat 26 26 19 19 59 59 104
Black 1 1 1 1 7 7 9
Unknown 4 4 3 3 11 11 18
White 26 26 16 16 49 49 91
Gross
Misdemeanor 10 10 9 9 11 11 30
Am Ind/Alaskan
Nat 3 3 3 3 3 3 9
Unknown 1 1 3 3 1 1 5
White 6 6 3 3 7 7 16
Misdemeanor 9 9 9 9 12 12 30
Am Ind/Alaskan
Nat 3 3 4 4 7
Unknown 4 4 2 2 3 3 9
White 5 5 4 4 5 5 14
Male 2 191 193 7 164 171 7 331 338 702
Felony 2 129 131 3 117 120 7 299 306 557
Am Ind/Alaskan
Nat 45 45 3 33 36 2 123 125 206
Asian/Pacific 1 1 1

21
 Islander
Black 2 2 3 3 3 11 14 19
Unknown 7 7 4 4 15 15 26
White 2 75 77 77 77 2 149 151 305
Gross
Page 26 of 32

Misdemeanor 40 40 2 24 26 13 13 79
Am Ind/Alaskan
Nat 11 11 2 9 11 3 3 25
Black 1 1 1
Unknown 2 2 4 4 6
White 27 27 11 11 9 9 47
Misdemeanor 22 22 2 23 25 18 18 65
Am Ind/Alaskan
Nat 5 5 2 2 3 3 10
Black 1 1 2 3 5 6
Unknown 4 4 4 4 3 3 11
White 12 12 14 14 12 12 38
Petty
Misdemeanor 1 1 1
Unknown 1 1 1
Grand Total 2 267 269 7 221 228 7 480 487 984

*Pretrial Agent Tasks

2020 2021 2022 Grand Total
Juvenile Unknown Hispanic Unknown Hispanic Unknown
Female 1 1 1 3
Am Ind/Alaskan Nat 1 1 2
Unknown 1 1
Male 11 1 10 18 40
Am Ind/Alaskan Nat 1 1 1 3
Unknown 7 1 5 5 18
White 3 4 12 19
Grand Total 11 1 11 1 19 43
22
Page 27 of 32

o Probation Population

Non
Offense Previous Year American Other Hispanic
Year Type County Adult/Juvenile Level Year Entries Removals End Males Females White Black Indian Asian Race Hispanic Unknown
2020 DOC Hubbard Adult Felony 221 37 83 177 118 59 116 6 35 0 20 5 172
2020 DOC Hubbard Adult Gross Misd 105 39 40 101 71 30 65 0 25 0 11 0 101
2020 DOC Hubbard Adult Misd 18 12 12 19 14 5 14 1 3 0 1 0 19
2020 DOC Hubbard Juvenile Juvenile 21 8 10 19 15 4 7 0 1 0 11 0 19

Total 365 96 145 316 218 98 202 7 64 0 43 5 311

Non
Offense Previous Year American Other Hispanic
Year Type County Adult/Juvenile Level Year Entries Removals End Males Females White Black Indian Asian Race Hispanic Unknown
2021 DOC Hubbard Adult Felony 177 52 47 187 132 55 129 6 31 0 21 6 181
2021 DOC Hubbard Adult Gross Misd 99 42 50 87 64 23 51 1 21 0 14 0 87
2021 DOC Hubbard Adult Misd 18 14 10 21 19 2 17 0 2 0 2 0 21
2021 DOC Hubbard Juvenile Juvenile 20 15 20 15 11 4 9 0 3 0 3 1 14

Total 314 123 127 310 226 84 206 7 57 0 40 7 303

23
 Non
Offense Previous Year American Other Hispanic
Year Type County Adult/Juvenile Level Year Entries Removals End Males Females White Black Indian Asian Race Hispanic Unknown
2022 DOC Hubbard Adult Felony 189 85 46 234 154 80 147 6 60 0 21 4 230
Page 28 of 32

2022 DOC Hubbard Adult Gross Misd 88 37 28 93 64 29 54 3 25 0 11 0 93

2022 DOC Hubbard Adult Misd 21 13 13 19 14 5 13 0 2 0 4 0 19
2022 DOC Hubbard Juvenile Juvenile 15 15 12 18 14 4 7 0 3 0 8 0 18

Total 313 150 99 364 246 118 221 9 90 0 44 4 360

o Supervised Release (SR), Parole, and Intensive Supervised Release (ISR) Population
2020 2020 Total 2021 2021 Total 2022 2022 Total Grand Total
Non Hispanic Hispanic Non Hispanic Hispanic Non Hispanic
Intensive Supervised Release 4 4 2 2 6
Male 4 4 2 2 6
American Indian or Alaskan 3 3 3
Native
Black 1 1 1
White–Non-Hispanic 2 2 2
Standard Supervised Release 36 36 1 36 37 2 34 36 109
Female 3 3 3 3 3 3 9
American Indian or Alaskan 1 1 1
Native
American Indian-Non 1 1 1
Hispanic
White 2 2 2
White–Non-Hispanic 2 2 3 3 5
Male 33 33 1 33 34 2 31 33 100
American Indian or Alaskan 9 9 9
Native
American Indian-Non 7 7 9 9 16
Hispanic
Black 2 2 2
Black-Non Hispanic 2 2 2 2 4
24
 White 22 22 22
White–Hispanic 1 1 2 2 3
White–Non-Hispanic 24 24 20 20 44
Grand Total 40 40 1 38 39 2 34 36 115
Page 29 of 32

In addition, please provide the following:

▪ Average Caseload Sizes by Caseload Type
▪ Percentage and number of probation clients by Risk Levels (Very High/High, Medium, Low, and Unknown)
*Select agents supervise clients across multiple counties. *Risk Level snapshot in Dec 2022.

Per Policy- Prescreen

No Assmt Low--No Total
High Low Medium Required Assmt Unknown # Total %
Risk Level # % # % # % # % # % # %
Adult 39 100.00% 162 99.39% 117 96.69% 0.00% 9 90.00% 45 83.33% 372 95.63%
Aaron W. 5 12.82% 16 9.82% 13 10.74% 0.00% 0.00% 12 22.22% 46 11.83%
Schueller
James Kanten 11 28.21% 31 19.02% 36 29.75% 0.00% 2 20.00% 12 22.22% 92 23.65%
Jody (Joe) 12 30.77% 20 12.27% 38 31.40% 0.00% 4 40.00% 9 16.67% 83 21.34%
Peterson
Kayla Simon 10 25.64% 27 16.56% 16 13.22% 0.00% 1 10.00% 3 5.56% 57 14.65%
Tabitha M. 1 2.56% 68 41.72% 14 11.57% 0.00% 2 20.00% 9 16.67% 94 24.16%
Schacht
Juvenile 0.00% 1 0.61% 4 3.31% 2 100.00% 1 10.00% 9 16.67% 17 4.37%
Tabitha M. 0.00% 1 0.61% 4 3.31% 2 100.00% 1 10.00% 9 16.67% 17 4.37%
25
 Schacht
Grand Total 39 100.00% 163 100.00% 121 100.00% 2 100.00% 10 100.00% 54 100.00% 389 100.00%

Juvenile
Per
Page 30 of 32

Policy- Prescreen
No Low--No Total
Low Medium LSCMI Assmt Unknown # Total %
Assignment Type # % # % # % # % # %
Intake/Pretrial/Investigation
Caseload-includes incoming
transfers 0.00% 1 25.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5 55.56% 6 35.29%
Pre-Trial Supervision 0.00% 0.00% 1 50.00% 0.00% 2 22.22% 3 17.65%
Traditional Supervision 1 100.00% 3 75.00% 1 50.00% 1 100.00% 2 22.22% 8 47.06%
Grand Total 1 100.00% 4 100.00% 2 100.00% 1 100.00% 9 100.00% 17 100.00%

Adult
Prescreen
Low--No Total
High Low Medium Assmt Unknown # Total %
Assignment Type # % # % # % # % # %
Felony 33 84.62% 119 73.46% 87 74.36% 2 22.22% 23 51.11% 264 70.97%
CIP 0.00% 3 1.85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3 0.81%
Enhanced Supervision 21 53.85% 3 1.85% 1 0.85% 0.00% 1 2.22% 26 6.99%
ESO Phase 1 4 10.26% 1 0.62% 2 1.71% 0.00% 3 6.67% 10 2.69%
ESO Phase 2 0.00% 1 0.62% 3 2.56% 0.00% 0.00% 4 1.08%
ESO Phase 3 0.00% 3 1.85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3 0.81%
ESO Phase 4 0.00% 6 3.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6 1.61%
Intake/Pretrial/Investigation
Caseload-includes incoming
transfers 1 2.56% 4 2.47% 3 2.56% 0.00% 7 15.56% 15 4.03%
Pre-Trial Supervision 3 7.69% 1 0.62% 2 1.71% 0.00% 4 8.89% 10 2.69%
Traditional Supervision 4 10.26% 97 59.88% 76 64.96% 2 22.22% 8 17.78% 187 50.27%
26
 Gross Misdemeanor 6 15.38% 36 22.22% 25 21.37% 6 66.67% 15 33.33% 88 23.66%
Enhanced Supervision 4 10.26% 0.00% 1 0.85% 0.00% 0.00% 5 1.34%
ESO Phase 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 2.22% 1 0.27%
ESO Phase 3 0.00% 1 0.62% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 0.27%
Intake/Pretrial/Investigation
Caseload-includes incoming
Page 31 of 32

transfers 0.00% 0.00% 1 0.85% 1 11.11% 1 2.22% 3 0.81%

Pre-Trial Supervision 0.00% 1 0.62% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 0.27%
Traditional Supervision 2 5.13% 34 20.99% 23 19.66% 5 55.56% 13 28.89% 77 20.70%
Misdemeanor 0.00% 7 4.32% 5 4.27% 1 11.11% 7 15.56% 20 5.38%
Enhanced Supervision 0.00% 1 0.62% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 0.27%
Intake/Pretrial/Investigation
Caseload-includes incoming
transfers 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 2.22% 1 0.27%
Pre-Trial Supervision 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 2.22% 1 0.27%
Traditional Supervision 0.00% 6 3.70% 5 4.27% 1 11.11% 5 11.11% 17 4.57%
Grand Total 39 100.00% 162 100.00% 117 100.00% 9 100.00% 45 100.00% 372 100.00%

Please also provide the following outcomes for CY 2022:

• Percent of adult probation cases successfully closed and unsuccessfully closed.
• Percent of juvenile probation cases successfully closed and unsuccessfully closed.
Successful Unsuccessful Total # of cases Total %
Adult # of cases % # of cases %
Felony 37 35.24% 24 22.86% 61 58.10%
Discharge-Early 13 12.38% 0.00% 13 12.38%
Discharge-Expiration 16 15.24% 0.00% 16 15.24%
Dismiss 8 7.62% 0.00% 8 7.62%
Executed-Client Demanded-COC serving MCF (Felony
Supervision) 0.00% 9 8.57% 9 8.57%
Executed-Client Demanded-LOC (GM/M Supervision) 0.00% 1 0.95% 1 0.95%
Executed-COC serving MCF (Felony Supervision) 0.00% 13 12.38% 13 12.38%
Executed-MultipleOffenseLevels 0.00% 1 0.95% 1 0.95%
Gross Misdemeanor 23 21.90% 6 5.71% 29 27.62%
Discharge-Early 6 5.71% 0.00% 6 5.71%
27
 Discharge-Expiration 13 12.38% 0.00% 13 12.38%
Dismiss 4 3.81% 0.00% 4 3.81%
Executed-Client Demanded-COC serving MCF (Felony
Supervision) 0.00% 1 0.95% 1 0.95%
Executed-Client Demanded-LOC (GM/M Supervision) 0.00% 2 1.90% 2 1.90%
Page 32 of 32

Executed-Court-LOC (GM/M Supervision cases) 0.00% 3 2.86% 3 2.86%

Misdemeanor 12 11.43% 3 2.86% 15 14.29%
Discharge-Early 3 2.86% 0.00% 3 2.86%
Discharge-Expiration 8 7.62% 0.00% 8 7.62%
Dismiss 1 0.95% 0.00% 1 0.95%
Executed-Client Demanded-LOC (GM/M Supervision) 0.00% 3 2.86% 3 2.86%
Grand Total 72 68.57% 33 31.43% 105 100.00%

Successful Total # of cases Total %

Juvenile # of cases %
Discharge-Early 7 35.00% 7 35.00%
Discharge-Expiration 6 30.00% 6 30.00%
Dismiss 7 35.00% 7 35.00%
Grand Total 20 100.00% 20 100.00%

28