Since 2008, Yolo County has entered four 3-year agreements with the federal government to provide beds at the Yolo County Juvenile Detention Facility (JDF) for Unaccompanied Children who meet Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) secure placement criteria. With the current 24-bed agreement term ending on January 31, 2020, the Probation Department is seeking Board direction related to applying for a new three-year ORR grant.
ORR Program Benefits
Since 2008, Yolo County’s juvenile justice program has benefited from these ORR grant awards, which include:
- Increased detention officer-to-youth ratios which have accommodated additional programming, and when needed, adequate staff for emergency incident management
- Enhanced training for staff, i.e. cultural awareness, LGBTQ
- Resurfacing of the recreation yard and other programming amenities
- Funding support for approximately 25-30% of department administration (see Attachment A for additional budget detail)
Countywide Opportunity Costs
The ORR secure placement agreements however, have also resulted in opportunity costs to the Yolo County criminal justice system as existing limited staff resources with increasing frequency have been diverted to addressing issues associated with the ORR program. Opportunity costs to the organization include time that ideally would be devoted to the goals below, but is instead taken up responding to media inquiries and Public Records Act requests, facilitating tours and providing data and responses for audits associated with the ORR program.
- Leadership time that could otherwise be devoted to implementing programs with better outcomes for Yolo adults and juveniles in alignment with the Board’s Strategic Plan goal of ‘Safe Communities’
- Completing a departmental Strategic Plan in alignment with the County Strategic Plan
- Strengthened leadership for the initiatives of the Community Correction Partnership
- Development and implementation of programs designed to reduce recidivism and divert youth from the adult criminal justice system
- Implementation of Quality Assurance and Continuous Quality Improvement processes to assure fidelity to and efficacy of programs to reduce recidivism
- Update to the department’s Policies & Procedures
Put simply, the County will never be able to fully focus on the needs of Yolo youth and adults while time is increasingly diverted to ORR activities due to the current turmoil associated with national policies.
ORR Program Challenges
There are a number of factors that have contributed to not only Probation staff resources being diverted to manage the ORR Secure Placement program, but also staff from the County Administrator’s Office, County Counsel’s Office, Health & Human Services Agency and Sheriff’s Office. Over the years, the profile of Unaccompanied Children has changed and over time an increasing number of youth placed by ORR exhibit more challenging-to-manage mental illness. Youth placed in the ORR program have been subjected to significant trauma, community violence and marginalization resulting in illness which would be better addressed in a locked therapeutic facility. Regrettably, ORR does not have contracts with locked therapeutic facilities for their placements in need of such specialized programs.
In addition to the depletion of staff resources is the collateral impact of the Trump Administration’s immigration policies and related family separations at the border. Attachment B highlights an unusual amount of media attention related to the ORR agreement since early 2017, which continues to this day. Besides staff resources required to respond to increased media attention, both locally and nationally, it has been challenging to help the media and public understand the difference between family separations at the border and the ORR secure placement program in Yolo County. It has also been challenging to adequately respond to media inquiries and combat misinformation as the ORR agreement requires the media to be referred to ORR, which is often non-responsive in a timely manner.
Similar to media inquiries, the activities of the Trump Administration have led to increased scrutiny of the ORR secure placement program, resulting in additional audits, increased requests for program tours and grand jury investigations, each of which require resource-intensive and time-consuming responses. As an example, the Attorney General’s audit required two weeks of almost the entire Probation management team’s time.
ORR Program Risks
Public sentiment concerning immigration and family separations is not anticipated to change in the near future, nor are the related policies of the Trump Administration. As such, there are additional risks beyond the challenges described above. This past year, the Administration unexpectedly directed the elimination of reimbursement for education and recreation services for Unaccompanied Children (this directive was later rescinded). Additionally, nationwide, there has been an increase in lawsuits brought by advocacy groups in response to the actions of the Trump Administration.
Options for Next Steps
At this time, there are three possible avenues (staffing and budget detail provided in Attachment A):
Option A: Apply for a new 3-year grant award with ORR
Should this be the Board’s direction, the following changes in the County’s application are recommended for both the safety of youth and staff, as well as effective program administration to lessen the burden on the organization:
- Limit the number of beds available to 16
- Only permit male youth, no younger than 15 years or age to be placed
- Require that placements are pending a current current criminal charge or have been adjudicated for a criminal charge in the U.S.
- Include staffing for a dedicated ORR program administrator
- ORR demonstration of contracts with mental health facilities for placement of youth with serious mental health conditions which cannot be addressed in the JDF
Should these requirements be met by ORR, while reduced, the impacts from housing the ORR program as described above are still anticipated.
Option B: Not pursue a new ORR grant award and return the JDF to the lower BSCC standard staff-to-youth ratio to minimize the resulting funding gap
This option returns the JDF to a 1:10 staff-to-youth ratio to achieve a break-even budget impact, yet results in a greater number of layoffs (estimated 27 full-time equivalent [FTE] positions vs 22 in Option C). This reduction in force puts the staff and youth in the JDF at the greatest risk as there will be very limited resources to respond to needs/issues, and no staff to respond to simultaneous events. While extra help staff is utilized during spikes in the detention population or staff absences, it cannot be relied upon in this scenario due to mandated training required to independently oversee the youth which extra help staff do not possess.
Also, due to reduced staffing, a majority of non-mandated programming will have to be eliminated. These programs include pro-social and recreation activities, as well as potentially the volunteer program. This option will likely also impact Probation services in the event of staffing shortages in the JDF, and is not expected to be sustainable.
Recommended Option C: Not pursue a new ORR grant award but maintain a higher staff-to-youth ratio
Considering both the costs and the benefits of the ORR program, it is the recommendation of the Chief Probation Officer that Yolo County not pursue an additional ORR grant. The Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Commission was queried about this option and said they supported the Chief’s recommendation. This recommendation is not reached lightly given the impacts to the Probation Department, possibly County general fund, and most importantly, our staff.
In addition to the recommendation not to pursue an another agreement with ORR is the recommendation to maintain a staff-to-youth ratio of 1:8 based on best practices and PREA standards.
Should the County not pursue a new agreement for a Yolo ORR Secure Placement Program, the impacts of this recommended option would be as follows (see Attachment A for more detail on staffing and budget impacts, and how they might be addressed):
- Overall JDF budget reduction: $2,908,489 (last 5 months of ORR 2019-20 budget)
- Public Safety fund backfill and position vacancies required in 2019-20: $770,470
- Public Safety fund backfill and position vacancies required in 2020-21: $642,006 (Note: includes COLAs but does not include a percentage of department administration costs [approximately $285,000] which will transfer to and impact other Probation programs with changes in overall department staffing ratios)
- Position reductions: 17 sworn FTEs (resulting in 13 layoffs) and 16 civil FTEs (resulting in 9 layoffs) in JDF program, plus 1 FTE reduction in Probation Department administration.See Attachment A for specific position detail, including existing vacancies which reduce the number of layoffs.
With positions held vacant, pending retirements and other employment opportunities within the department (7 non-detention positions and 1 limited term position), approximately 22 layoffs are expected. In anticipation of layoffs in the Probation Department, the Sheriff’s Department is delaying filling certain positions that could possibly be filled by affected Probation staff. Likewise, the Health & Human Service Agency may be able to accommodate clinician and administrative positions. With adequate notice, there also exists the opportunity for impacted staff to find employment with local partners and adjacent counties which department management will work actively to facilitate. As the current ORR agreement ends in January, a timely decision on pursuing another ORR grant will assist in appropriate planning for staffing the JDF and employees impacted by layoffs.
Planning for the Future
To lessen the budget impact described above, the Board may also want to consider seeking BSCC approval to house adult offenders in the JDF during the jail construction activities, anticipated to begin this spring and take two years. Besides addressing an immediate need for the Sheriff’s Office, housing adult offenders in Yolo County vs a neighboring county will result in cost avoidances in an amount yet to be determined. This time frame also provides the County two years to adequately contemplate and plan for the future of the JDF, as well as other criminal justice priorities. Such a planning effort would be in concert with other counties who are also evaluating the future of their JDFs. Due to sustained low JDF populations throughout the state, the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) has formed a working group to look at the issue from a statewide perspective. This two-year timeframe allows us an opportunity to consider all options for the future (including non-secure placement needs, i.e. a group home type setting) with the benefit of expertise from our colleagues in CSAC and other counties. See Attachment A for a timeline of milestones in such a planning effort.
Finally, the Board previously considered an option which would close the JDF to both ORR and Yolo youth, and instead contract for beds in an adjacent county. As the Board did not support moving forward with this option, staff have not completed further analysis. It however, remains a viable option should the board wish to reconsider. |