2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Table of Contents

Transcription

1 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Table of Contents Commissioner Clarke Financial Implication of Separate Presidential Election pg. 1 Per Pupil Cost pg. 2 Commissioner Dunlap Specialty Court for the Homeless Court pg. 3 Supplemental Item I pg. 5 Supplemental Item II pg. 14 Commissioner Leake Designated Shower & Bathroom Facilities for the Homeless pg. 23 Financial Assistance in Specific Geographic Locations pg. 27 Supplemental Item I pg. 29 Child Care Vouchers pg. 39 Barber Scotia College Student Housing pg. 41 Research for Small Business Startup Programs for Minorities pg. 43 Commissioner Puckett Breakdown of County Tax Bill pg. 48 Commissioner Ridenhour Human Trafficking pg. 51 Commissioner Scarborough Economic Development and Homelessness pg. 52 Sale or Lease of School Facilities pg. 57

2 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topics of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Clarke Topic of Interest #1: Financial Implication of Separate Presidential Election I just learned that the General Assembly is going to require a separate Presidential primary be held in North Carolina in February 2016 within one week after the South Carolina Presidential primary. I had assumed the primary election for other offices would be held the same day, but apparently that is not correct; the primary date for other offices, such as county commissioner, register of deeds, soil conservation commissioners, etc. will be May 3, I would like to know how much more local taxpayer money we will have to include in our FY 2016 budget to hold a stand-alone Presidential primary in FY I would also like to know if the General Assembly is expected to include any money in its budget to pay for all or part of the cost of holding a stand-alone Presidential primary in Response The change in the date for the presidential preference primary is a result of S.L the Voter Information Verification Act (VIVA). As noted below, North Carolina will now follow immediately after South Carolina holds their first presidential preference primary. South Carolina presidential primaries have tended to be held, most recently in the middle of January (2004, 2008, 2012) and prior to that they were held in late February or the first half of March. At the December 2014 North Carolina State Board of Elections Director s Conference, election directors were informed to be prepared for a February stand-alone Presidential Preference Primary. This rescheduling only affects the presidential preference primary, all other offices primaries would be held on the traditional first Tuesday after the first Monday in May that date being May 3, The estimated cost for a presidential preference primary, countywide, is approximately $500,000 including early voting and election day. It is not anticipated that the General Assembly will include funding in its budget to pay for the cost associated with holding a stand-alone presidential election Primary to be held; date; qualifications and registration of voters. On the Tuesday after the first Monday in May, 1992, and every four years thereafter, the voters of this State shall be given an opportunity to express their preference for the person to be the presidential candidate of their political party, except that if South Carolina holds its presidential primary before the 15th day of March, the North Carolina presidential preference primary shall be held on the Tuesday after the first South Carolina presidential preference primary of that year. Any person otherwise qualified who will become qualified by age to vote in the general election held in the same year of the presidential preference primary shall be entitled to register and vote in the presidential preference primary. Such persons may register not earlier than 60 days nor later than the last day for making application to register under G.S prior to the said primary. In addition, persons who will become qualified by age to register and vote in the general election for which the primary is held, who do not register during the special period may register to vote after such period as if they were qualified on the basis of age, but until they are qualified by age to vote, they may vote only in primary elections." 1

3 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topics of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Clarke Topic of Interest #2: Per Pupil Cost I would like to know on a per student basis, are we (the County) spending more or less (and, if so, how much more or less) in inflation-adjusted operating budget dollars on education than we did in FY 2008 when the recession began. Response In FY2008, the County funded Charlotte-Mecklenburg School s (CMS) operating at a rate of $2,581 perpupil. In FY2015, the County funded CMS operating at a rate of $2,674 per-pupil. At the time of completing this analysis, the 2015 National Consumer Price Index (CPI) was not available. Therefore, the 2008 funding of $2,581, adjusted by inflation in the CPI between 2008 and 2014, is equal to $2,838. This is ($164) less than FY2015 per-pupil funding of $2,674. This calculation is based on the County s funding for school operating and Consumer Price Index. A point of caution, is to be mindful that this calculation is based on the County s supplemental funding for operating and does not reflect the actual per-pupil cost to educate a student. Also, it does not include capital funding for school facilities the County s primary funding obligation. The County is one funding partner which supplements State operation funding. Other education funding partners include the State of North Carolina and the Federal Government. Also, the per-pupil County funding by fiscal year includes a growth factor percentage. To breakout each year s funding specific to growth will require additional analysis. 2

4 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Dunlap Topic of Interest: Specialty Court for the Homeless Court Homeless Court Research provide a summary of the research that has been completed on homeless court. Has the research suggested that the court is effective? What is the estimated cost to operate homeless court? Response: Over the past few months, two community groups have emerged advocating for new specialty courts in Mecklenburg County. The first group is the Charlotte School of Law, which desires a community court to serve the homeless, and the second is Operation Recovery, who is seeking a veterans court. In response, Community Support Services, Criminal Justice Services, and the Provided Services Organization have been working together to explore viable solutions for serving these at-risk populations effectively. To date, we have gathered some preliminary data on arrested persons who were homeless and veterans, met with criminal justice stakeholders, and conducted research on solutions employed in other jurisdictions across the country. In February, the Center for Court Innovation will be in Charlotte and we will seek their perspective on the use of specialty courts for these populations. A small contingent (Tom Eberly, Stacy Lowry, Melissa Neal, and Todd Nuccio) will also travel to Denver, Colorado for an event hosted by the Bureau of Justice Assistance on chronic, low-level offenders. Denver is in the midst of implementing sweeping changes in working with homeless, veterans, and persons with behavioral health issues and this federally-funded trip will be an excellent opportunity to learn and exchange ideas. The three collaborating county departments, along with assistance from the Mecklenburg County Sheriff s Office, have produce two exploratory documents to date, an overview of specialty courts for homeless and veterans and a data analysis on roughly 900 homeless and veterans booked into the Mecklenburg County Jail during FY14. Both of these documents are attached, but they are truly preliminary in nature and they have been used to engage local stakeholders in planning discussions. The general consensus, thus far, from these conversations is that Mecklenburg County needs to develop multiple intercept points to effectively and efficiently serve the homeless and veteran populations. The four identified intercept points are as follows: 1) Pre-Booking- At this initial intercept point the emphasis will be on diverting homeless and veterans from the criminal justice system when possible. Seattle, Washington, for example, has created a program whereby law enforcement officers connect at-risk populations directly with community-based caseworkers in lieu of arrest. 2) Pretrial- If homeless and veterans get arrested, the second intercept point will be identifying individuals at jail intake and during the pretrial phase of the criminal case. Efforts will focus on early screening and triaging individuals to determine their service and legal needs. Ideally, care coordinators will be assigned during this stage to ensure that all resources (i.e., jail treatment/medical staff, defense attorneys, community-service providers, etc.) are mobilized and coordinated effectively. The appropriateness of diverting the criminal case will also be explored during this stage. 3

5 3) Adjudication- Cases involving homeless and veterans that advance to the adjudication phase of the court process will be, depending on the nature of the charges, referred to a specialty court. This intercept point may take shape in two ways: 1) an existing treatment courts may be modified to work with the target population, and/or 2) a new court for homeless and/or veterans may be formed. Regarding the latter, there are several models from around the country that may serve as possible models. For the homeless population, San Diego and Orange County, NC, conduct court sessions in the community (e.g. at shelters) to resolve outstanding misdemeanor offenses and warrants. These courts combine a progressive plea bargaining approach with a network of services that help resolve issues confronting persons who are homeless. Veterans courts, in contrast, provide a highly structured environment that military veterans are accustomed to and they offer intensive court supervision coupled with comprehensive Veterans Administration-driven treatment services. These types of courts originated in Buffalo, NY, and they are currently being replicated in jurisdictions across North Carolina. 4) Post Adjudication- The last intercept point will target individuals who are not identified early, ineligible for diversion or the specialty courts, initially refuse services, and/or require on-going services after the resolution of their criminal case. The objective during this phase will be to target specific individuals who are highly vulnerable, plus chronic system users, and engage them in services to prevent recidivism. Minneapolis, for instance, identifies the top 100 chronic misdemeanor offenders in their downtown district and provides these individual with wrap-around services, including supportive housing. Sacramento has a similar approach for serial homeless and inebriates. Again, it is envisioned that care coordinators will work with this target population in Mecklenburg County, and that MeckFUSE (which is currently at capacity) will be expanded. The Criminal Justice Advisory Group (CJAG) is forming a work group consisting of criminal justice stakeholders and community partners to explore developing the above four-point intercept model. The working group will examine legal ramifications and assess resource needs at each phase. Cost estimates for each component of the intercept model, including the cost of operating the specialty courts, will be prepared and presented to the County Manager in the coming months. 4

6 Introduction Specialty Court for the Homeless and Veterans Mecklenburg County Community Support Services (CSS), Criminal Justice Services (CJS), and the Provided Services Organization (PSO) are partnering with affordable housing advocacy group Helping Homeless to Housing (HHH) and Charlotte School of Law s Civil Rights Clinic (CSL), is considering how to constructively address the special issues faced by homeless individuals, veterans, and homeless veterans with pending or outstanding cases in the criminal justice system. Based upon successful homeless and veteran court programs across the country, this proposal is being recommended to create the most effective and sustainable program for these groups here in Mecklenburg County with the assistance of our local court system. According to a report generated by Mecklenburg County Sheriff s Office, 294 individuals were booked who indicated a homeless or unknown address generating 492 individual bookings for the fiscal year of It was found that 376 veterans were booked generating 431 individual bookings and 12 individuals identified as both homeless and veteran status generating 14 bookings. The combined total of offenses for all groups was 2,328 with the following breakdown of charge type: 60.05% misdemeanor, 30.75% felony and 9.28% traffic. This indicates that the majority of offenses are low-level misdemeanors (second degree trespass, solicit alms, obtain property false pretense, resisting public officer, etc.), landing the offenders in jail where they are booked and likely released without adequate support to reduce recidivism. Based on an analysis conducted by Criminal Justice Services, approximately one out of three (27% - 37%) veterans booked were charged with a drug and/or alcohol related crime, and the number was similar for those experiencing homelessness. Further, it was determined that approximately one out of five (18% - 23%) offenses charged to veterans will be related to drugs and/or alcohol. It was found that less than 1% of the analyzed sample of veterans was currently active in a treatment program and an analysis of the existing treatment courts revealed that only 5% of the total FY 2014 participants were veterans. Additionally, 20% of the individuals in the sample were booked five or more times throughout the year meeting frequent booking criteria. These individuals accounted for 46% of the total jail days from this sample. The majority of individuals of the frequent booking category were identified as homeless. Thus, it is clear: veterans and homeless individuals need support in navigating the current court system, substance abuse is not the sole issue that contributes to their involvement in the legal system, and other factors such as housing and comprehensive support should be considered. Based on this information, these individuals do not fit easily into the current criminal justice system of Mecklenburg County. While the Specialty Court for the Homeless and Veterans (SCHV) seeks to operate in a way that enhances the efforts of other specialty courts, it is unique in two major aspects. First, the SCHV seeks to target needs such as housing and veteran issues that may not be addressed in the other court structures. The relationship between substance abuse, mental health, homelessness and veteran status 5

7 is well documented and speaks to the need for a comprehensive approach by the legal system to address homelessness and veteran needs. Current specialty courts provide useful assistance to people dealing with substance abuse and mental health conditions, but there is evidence that many veterans and homeless individuals are not receiving adequate access to needed services. The SCHV would establish two separate tracks, one for veterans and one for homeless individuals, to ensure the needs for each group are met. Second, this is a diversionary program that attempts to intervene at two different phases in the criminal justice process. The diversionary aspect of this program seeks to prevent the individual from being funneled through the system by ensuring prompt access to treatment, court efficiency, and links individuals to pre-existing community resources. Benefits of SCHV Savings and Benefits in Other Communities Veteran and homeless courts throughout the country have documented cost savings and other benefits in their communities. San Diego, CA The following savings and benefits were reported from February 2011 to February 2012 for San Diego s Veteran Court: Diverted 21 veterans in VTRC program saving $530,000 in jail costs VA paid for treatment for the 21 participants, saving the county equivalent of $409,000 for 3,500 residential days Low Recidivism: 4.7% While it is difficult to document the monetary savings from the Homeless Court that operates in San Diego, the court does provide a benefit for the criminal justice system by reducing booking costs, court costs, and court time. Los Angeles, CA According to the LA County District Attorney s office their community s Veteran Court, their Veteran Court program has now saved taxpayers approximately $3 million by shifting veterans away from prison and providing treatment. Buffalo City, NY Buffalo City, NY documented zero recidivism after the first two years of operation of its Veteran Court. The court reports that $32,000 per year to hold a prisoner in their county jail compared to an estimated figure of $7,000 or less for participation in their Veteran Court. 6

8 Expense to Mecklenburg County of Leaving Veteran and Homeless Needs Unaddressed By not pursuing a new paradigm on addressing the needs of the homeless and veterans, our community runs the risk of criminalizing individuals who are vulnerable and in need of comprehensive, supportive services. The traditional criminal justice system is highly ineffective at meeting the needs of these two groups, and as a result they consume an abundance of jail bed days, court docket space, and system resources at a significant cost even though they are frequently charged with low level offenses. Indeed, the cumulative jail days consumed by homeless and veterans is conservatively estimated to be more than 15,000 annually. The issues found in the homeless and veteran populations are more in line with public health than criminal justice. For a more effective cost-savings model, we need to divert or transition these groups to a new community-driven solution, such as sustainable housing with wrap-around services. For example, a study conducted by the University of North Carolina Charlotte on the first year of operation at Moore Place (a permanent supportive housing program for men and women who have dealt with chronic homelessness) found that the average chronically homeless individual costs Charlotte $40,000 per year in crisis system usage (including jail). In contrast, Moore Place ends an individual s homelessness, improves health, and reduces inappropriate crisis systems use at an annual cost of $13,000. With the SCHV approach of helping the homeless access housing, it would save the community money by contributing to the end of homelessness in Mecklenburg County. Additional Benefits We also hope to see the following additional benefits that are currently not addressed in our community through the SCHV: Place a focus on homeless individuals and homeless veterans who are repeat offenders, preventing these groups from cycling in and out of the legal system; Connect homeless and veteran service providers to these individuals; Allow additional support in accomplishing the community-wide efforts of the Housing Our Heroes challenge to end veteran homelessness by 2015; Allow additional support in accomplishing the community-wide efforts of the Housing First Charlotte-Mecklenburg initiative to end chronic homelessness by the end of 2016; Prevent bookings of homeless individuals for misdemeanor and public ordinance crimes that are attached to their homeless status; Engage individuals through Coordinated Assessment that will help achieve the goal of ending chronic homelessness by 2016; Enhance the relationship between already-existing specialty courts by involving Homeless Services, Veterans Services, and Mecklenburg County Criminal Justice Services; Improve awareness and access to housing and veterans services amongst all of the specialty courts; Minimize recidivism due to increased level of support; and Create a system in which individuals dealing with homelessness exit the court system with more stable lives and a respect for the court system because it has acknowledged their hard work in overcoming adversity. 7

9 Prospective Model: Purpose, Policies, and Procedures Purpose The suggested purpose, policies, and procedures of the Mecklenburg County SCHV Program reflect what has been determined to be the best practices from other programs around the country, and that comport with the American Bar Association s (ABA) recommendations on delivery of legal services to individuals experiencing homelessness. Policies The SCHV will address issues related to homelessness and issues related to veterans. The individual must be literally homeless according to the Coordinated Assessment definition. Veterans not facing homelessness but facing other issues that SCHV service providers address, will be eligible for the SCHV Program on a case-by-case basis. The SCHV will take these individuals if the currently existing veteran s court (Operation Recovery) does not have the capability to meet the individuals needs. The court will operate on a bi-weekly basis, rotating sessions between specifically homeless individuals and veteran individuals. The court will operate out of the Mecklenburg County Courthouse, with transportation to the courthouse from the local shelters for individuals dealing with homelessness. An SCHV Coordinator position will be added to facilitate the program. This Coordinator will be in charge of program intake, working with the DA and defense attorney to come to an agreedupon case disposition, service provider follow-up, and reporting of candidate progress. Crimes that fall under the North Carolina Crime Victims Rights Act are excluded, as well as felonies, civil cases, juvenile cases, sex offenses, criminal domestic violence cases, child support, DUI and other traffic-related cases. An individual charged with multiple offenses can qualify for the program, as long as each crime charged is eligible. The following representatives have been involved in the creation of the SCHV and will continue to be involved in the running of the program: o Helping Homeless to Housing o The Mecklenburg County Public Defender s Office o Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department o Bar Certified Clinical Law Students and Supervising Professor Jason Huber from the Charlotte School of Law Civil Rights Clinic In addition to these representatives, the following will be needed to help run the SCHV: o Mecklenburg County District Attorneys Office o Trial Court Administrator s Office o Interested judges o SCHV Program Coordinator o Pro Bono Attorneys o Service providers with employment/educational advancement, counseling, substance abuse, mental health, housing, and community service resources Procedures (Provided as an Illustration) 1. A person identified as homeless or veteran through two diversionary methods. a. The first method focuses on diverting the homeless individual or veteran at the time of arrest. In this initial phase of police contact, the officer, through proper training, 8

10 identifies the individual as homeless and recommends the individual to the SCHV Coordinator for assessment. b. The second method focuses on diverting the homeless individual or veteran who is already incarcerated. This jail diversion method needs to be coordinated with jail personnel to allow recommendation to the SCHV for assessment. 2. The SCHV Coordinator is notified by the jail and assesses the individual. In assessing the individual, the Coordinator considers eligibility of offenses, prospective services needed, and considers homeless and veteran status. 3. If eligible, the individual is referred to the SCHV program, and placed on the appropriate track (homeless or veteran). a. If the individual is homeless, the court requires Coordinated Assessment to be completed. b. If the individual is a veteran, the court refers to Veteran s Services of Mecklenburg County or the VA by SCHV Coordinator. 4. The SCHV Coordinator works with the individual and their legal representation, (either the certified law students or pro bono attorneys) to come to an agreement on the appropriate case disposition for the candidate. 5. In session, the DA, SCHV Coordinator, and legal representation will report the agreed-upon disposition to the judge during the court session. The SCHV Coordinator is also responsible for reporting the recommendations from Coordinated Assessment or Veteran Services and/or VA. 6. The judge then makes a determination about the requirements for the individual. 7. The SCHV Coordinator works with the individual and service providers to facilitate completion of court recommendations. 8. The SCHV Coordinator reports back to court about the individual s progress. 9. If the individual does not complete recommendations, the person is routed through traditional court model for charge. 10. If the individual does complete recommendations, the person receives a dismissal for their charge(s). Potential Cost of Establishing a Specialty Court for Veterans and Homeless The potential cost of establishing the SCHV program need not be significant. The court will operate where there is current space within the Mecklenburg County courthouse. In many cities that have implemented similar models, the lawyers and judges provide volunteer services for the court to operate. If a decision is made to move forward, we can begin seeking partners who are interested in funding the cause. The primary potential cost would be for the SCHV Coordinator position. The expense of this position would be similar to other treatment court coordinator positions within North Carolina. The expense of the Veteran Court coordinator position in Harnett County, NC is 42,500. An estimate for a comparable position within Mecklenburg County is $54,400. 9

11 Orange County, NC, which has a similar program, has clinical law students run the court as the coordinator. This option could be available initially to cut costs. Other costs to run the program will include: office space for the SCHV Coordinator, printing costs, training supplies, office supplies, and costs associated with communicating with service providers. Future Considerations Budget/funding issues identified above Engaging repeat offenders in this new program Veteran participation rate in this program and other specialty programs (not just limited to Mecklenburg County) Collaboration between the court, service providers, and the SCHV Program Identifying and gathering resources from service providers Identifying partner agencies, such as shelters and veteran assistance programs Creating procedure to verify individuals status through documentation provided by the individual 10

12 Appendix A: Existing Homeless and Veteran Court Models San Diego Homeless Court 1 The San Diego Homeless Court Program (HCP) began in 1989 and is the model for similar programs that have been established throughout the country. The HCP is a special Superior Court session for homeless defendants convened in a homeless shelter to resolve outstanding misdemeanor offenses and warrants. To counteract the effect of criminal cases pushing homeless defendants further outside society, the HCP combines a progressive plea bargain system, alternative sentencing structure, assurance of no custody, and proof of program activities to address a full range of misdemeanor cases. Each month, a local homeless service agency hosts a special Superior Court session. The HCP builds on partnerships between the court, prosecutor, public defender, and local service agencies to help resolve the problems that homelessness represents with practical and effective solutions. We believe that when homeless participants work with agency representatives to identify and overcome the causes of their homelessness, they are in a stronger position to successfully comply with court orders. Initial referrals to HCP originate in the shelters and service agencies. Prior to the court hearing, the prosecution and defense review the cases and determine sentencing substitutes through participation in agency programs, in exchange for fines and custody. The HCP is designed for efficiency, as the majority of cases are heard and resolved in one hearing. There are several steps in the process: Step 1: Outreach/Roadshow. Initially, to help staff and case managers understand and visualize the HCP, an attorney from the Office of the Public Defender visits local shelters and service agencies to explain the HCP s purpose and process. Step 2: Interest List. After learning about the program through an outreach session or from the shelter staff, shelter residents sign-up on the HCP interest list. The list is forwarded to the Office of the Public Defender for a search of case files. Step 3: Plea Offers and Negotiations. The prosecutor reviews the case files of the defendants. The prosecutor makes offers for resolution of the cases based on criminal history, the impact of criminal behavior on the community, and the number of outstanding cases. The City Attorney offers a plea bargain in anticipation of proof of acknowledgement of each participant s involvement in his or her respective program. Step 4: Records Search. Using the information on the Interest List, the Deputy Clerk of the San Diego Superior Court conducts a criminal history search for open cases, further proceedings, warrants, and pending civil assessment penalties. Step 5: Active Cases Set for Hearing. The clerk prepares a court calendar/docket for the HCP hearing. This docket includes those who signed up on the Interest List and who were found to have outstanding active, non-felony, city of San Diego cases with the court. Step 6: Defense Attorney Consultations. One week prior to the hearing, the public defender meets participants. The public defender meets with the defendant to review his/her case(s). The public defender presents each individual s cases and proposed plea agreement as the worstcase scenario in order to help the participant face his/her greatest fears about the judicial 1 Excerpts and paraphrasing from information provided by Steve Binder of the San Diego Public Defender s Office and the Civil Rights Clinic of the Charlotte School of Law. 11

13 process. The defense attorney uses the shelter programs and recovery process to involve clients in successful court hearings. Step 7: The Hearing. The hearing is scheduled for the third Wednesday of each month. Hearings are alternately held at one of the two largest shelters in the San Diego area. Step 8: Follow-Up. The deputy clerk transfers the case disposition information written on the court order from the hearing into the court s database. There are several core elements this program has identified: 1. The Homeless Court Program Is a Voluntary Program. 2. The Homeless Court Program Addresses a Full Range of Misdemeanor Offenses. 3. The Homeless Court Program Uses a Progressive Plea Bargain System. 4. The Homeless Court Program Employs Alternative Sentencing. 5. No One Goes into Custody at Homeless Court. Veteran Treatment Courts in NC On a local level, NC District 11A in Harnett County recently celebrated one year of their Veteran Treatment Court (VTC) and Cumberland County started one this month. Currently, the Governor is pushing to have Veterans Courts throughout the state and the Governor s Crime Commission is providing start-up funding for these programs. The Harnett County Veteran Treatment Court is a highly structured court with participants viewed as the troops and the court & support personnel as the Command Structure that veterans are used to. Another important factor in that court is the Peer Support Specialists, or mentors. This model is fashioned in accordance with the guidelines of Justice For Vets ( and reflects a nation-wide trend of addressing the needs of veterans in a unique, but effective manner. Their Mission Statement is To respond collaboratively to promote public safety and reduce recidivism in a cost-effective way by providing veteran offenders with intensive court supervision and a comprehensive Veterans Administration driven treatment program resulting in a productive and law abiding life. There are Ten Key Components to the program: 1. VTC integrates Alcohol, Drug Treatment and Mental Health Services with Justice System case processing. 2. Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participant s due process rights. 3. Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the VTC Program. 4. VTC provides access to a continuum of alcohol, drug, mental health and other related treatment and rehabilitative services. 5. Abstinence is monitored by frequent and random (VALID-OBSERVED) alcohol and drug testing. 6. A coordinated strategy governs VTC responses to participant s compliance. 7. Ongoing Judicial interaction with each veteran is essential. 8. Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness. 12

14 9. Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective VTC planning, implementation, and operations. 10. Forging partnerships among VTC, Veterans Administration, public agencies, and communitybased organizations generates local support and enhances VTC effectiveness. The Objectives of the VTC are: - Keep veterans engaged in the VTC Process - Reduce Alcohol and Drug Use among participants - Reduce Re-arrest Rate among participants - Ensure Veterans are getting the treatment they need - Have a Mentor ready to receive the participant - Rewards & Sanctions - Rebuild the Support Net for the Veteran - Maintain Continuous Communications with all parties involved As mentioned earlier, the Mentors are in integral part of the VTC Process: - All volunteer force - Critical to success of VTC - Assigned based on Service affiliation and appropriate age (when possible) - Provides Peer Support - Assists with travel to VA Medical care and Court when necessary - Helps veteran navigate the Court System, VA System - Keeps Court informed of any issues involving the participant - 75% of the time the mentors are present to be a Military Buddy - All Veteran Mentors are screened and interviewed In summary, this model appears successful in other parts of the country but there currently isn t enough data available to assess the effectiveness of the program here in North Carolina however, early indications from Harnett County is that the program will be effective here. 13

15 2015 Veteran and Homeless Jail Bookings in Mecklenburg County Michael Griswold, MPA Mecklenburg County Criminal Justice Services 14

16 Executive Summary PERIOD: SCOPE: July 2013 June 2014 (except where otherwise indicated) The scope of this analysis was defined to answer four critical questions with respect to Mecklenburg County s veteran and homeless population. 1. What charges are involved when Mecklenburg County s veterans and homeless are booked? 2. How many of Mecklenburg County s veterans and homeless have a history of substance abuse? 3. How many of Mecklenburg County s veterans and homeless are affected by mental illness? 4. Are Mecklenburg County s veterans and homeless currently being served in an existing treatment court? SUMMARY: The information provided in this report is limited primarily to charge data that was analyzed for the following groups: Veterans, Not Homeless; Homeless Veterans; and Homeless, Not Veterans. Charges and Offenses Property and Public Order crimes were by far the most frequently committed by the individuals in this sample at 27% and 26% respectively. Substance Abuse Approximately 1 out of 5 offenses charged were related to drugs and/or alcohol. This number is almost identical for the distinct veteran and homeless groups. Approximately 1 out of 3 individuals booked was charged with a drug and/or alcohol related crime. This number is almost identical for the distinct veteran and homeless groups. Possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of marijuana, and driving while impaired were the top three drug/alcohol related charges. Table 1-7 provides a complete list of the top 10 drug/alcohol related charges. Mental Health Previous research on mental illness within the jail revealed that about 8 to 9 people with a history of mental illness are booked in the County jail each day (about 3,214 positive mental health screens in 2013). In 2013, about 14% of mental health screenings at booking were positive. If we apply that rate to the number of veterans booked in FY14, we could estimate that about 50 of these individuals had a history of mental illness. Usage of Treatment Courts An analysis of the sample of bookings from FY14 revealed that less than 1% of the veterans in the sample are active clients in the Mecklenburg County STEP Program as of October 31, An alternate analysis of the STEP Program s Veterans Survey revealed that 318 total people were eligible and participated in the program as of October 31, Of these individuals, 17 were veterans. 15

17 1. Summary Tables Overall Bookings and Jail Days Among the three groups analyzed the Veterans, Not Homeless; the Homeless Veterans; and the Homeless, Not Veterans the Homeless, Not Veterans group had the largest average jail days per person. Homeless Veterans had almost 4 times the number of average charges per person of the other two groups. The Frequent Bookings group is a subset of the three groups and includes only individuals booked 5 or more times in FY14. FY14 Bookings # of Charges # of Individuals # of Bookings Charges Per Person Jail Days Jail Days Per Person Veterans, Not Homeless 1, , Veterans, Homeless Homeless, Not Veterans 1, , Total 2, , Frequent Bookings , Overall Charge and Offense Statistics Table 1-1 details the distribution of charges by offense group which are attributable to veterans, homeless individuals, and homeless veterans. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 1-1. Charges by Offense Group Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) Property % Public Order % Controlled Substance % Person % Traffic % Sex % Violent % Probation/Parole Violation % Other % Domestic Violence % DWI % Murder / Manslaughter % 2, % Table 1-2Error! Reference source not found. details the overall top ten offenses attributable to veterans, homeless individuals, and homeless veterans. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 1-2. Top 10 Offenses Overall Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) 1 SECOND DEGREE TRESPASS Public Order % 2 OBTAIN PROPERTY FALSE PRETENSE Property % 3 MISDEMEANOR LARCENY Property % 4 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % 5 RESISTING PUBLIC OFFICER Public Order % 6 ASSAULT ON A FEMALE Person % 7 SOLICIT ALMS/BEG FOR MONEY Public Order % 8 KNOW FICT/CANC/REV/SUSP LIC Traffic % T-9 DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED Traffic % T-9 COMMUNICATING THREATS Person % 1, % 16

18 An analysis of charges by age group shows that individuals between the ages of had the highest charge rate, as well as, the highest number of bookings. This fact remained consistent even when analyzing specifically for veterans, the homeless individuals, and the homeless veterans. Table 1-3. Combined Distribution of Charge Type by Age Grouping Age Grouping Felony Misdemeanor Traffic # of Charges # of Individuals # of Bookings Charges Per Person Jail Days Jail Days Per Person % 63.53% 7.29% , % 54.00% 15.25% , % 66.80% 7.44% , % 54.99% 8.96% , % 70.00% 6.67% , % % 0.00% % 60.05% 9.28% 2, , Table 1-4 details the total number of jail days for each group and also the proportion of the overall number of jail days for each group. Veterans, Not Homeless account for just over 50% of the total number of jail days observed in this sample. The less than 2 booking category was the largest proportion of each group. Table 1-4. Booking Frequency # of Bookings in FY14 Veterans, Not Homeless Veterans, Homeless Homeless, Not Veterans % Jail Days % Jail Days % Jail Days Less than % 5, % % 3, % 2, % % 2, % % % % % % % 7, % % 7,404 Substance and Alcohol Use About 20 percent of the charges analyzed were drug and alcohol-related charges. These most often fell under controlled substances charges, such possessing drug paraphernalia and possession of controlled substances (see Table 1-5). Table 1-5. Combined Charged Offenses Relating to Drugs and/or Alcohol Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) Controlled Substance % Public Order % Traffic % DWI % % 17

19 There was some variation among the groups with Veterans, Not Homeless having a majority of their charges falling into the controlled substance grouping but also having the smallest proportion of public order charges. The Homeless, Not Veterans group, however, had the highest proportion of public order charges among the three groups. Table 1-6. Combined Charged Offenses Relating to Drugs and/or Alcohol Offense Group Controlled Substance Public Order Traffic DWI Veterans, Not Homeless 67.5% 10.4% 19.8% 2.4% Veterans, Homeless 50% 14.3% 35.7% 0% Homeless, Not Veterans 62.2% 35.1% 2.3% 0.5% Table 1-7 details the top ten drug and alcohol related offenses from the total combined sample. Table 1-7. Top 10 Drug and/or Alcohol Related Offenses Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offense Count % of Overall Offenses 1 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % 2 DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED Traffic % 3 POSSESS MARIJUANA UP TO 1/2 OZ Controlled Substance % 4 POSS/CONS BEER/WINE PUBLIC ST Public Order % 5 FELONY POSSESSION OF COCAINE Controlled Substance % 6 INTOXICATED AND DISRUPTIVE Public Order % 7 OPEN CONTAINER ALCOHOL VIOL Public Order % 8 PWISD COCAINE Controlled Substance % 9 PWISD MARIJUANA Controlled Substance % 10 DELIVER COCAINE Controlled Substance % % 18

20 2. Veterans, Not Homeless: Overall Charge and Offense Statistics Table 2-1Error! Reference source not found. details the distribution of charges made in Mecklenburg County, which led to a booking and are attributable to veterans. Charges are organized by offense group. Table 2-1. Charges by Offense Group Offense Group Jail Days (#) Offenses (#) Offenses (%) Property % Traffic % Controlled Substance % Person % Public Order % Sex % Violent % Probation/Parole Violation % Other % Domestic Violence % DWI % Murder / Manslaughter % 1, % Table 2-2 details the overall top five offenses, which led to a booking and are attributable to non-homeless veterans. Table 2-2. Top 5 Offenses Overall Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) 1 OBTAIN PROPERTY FALSE PRETENSE Property % 2 MISDEMEANOR LARCENY Property % 3 ASSAULT ON A FEMALE Person % 4 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % 5 KNOW FICT/CANC/REV/SUSP LIC Traffic % % Substance and Alcohol Use Table 2-3 shows the top five drug and alcohol-related charges leading to a booking for non-homeless veterans. Table 2-3. Top 5 Offenses Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) 1 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % 2 DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED Traffic % 3 POSSESS MARIJUANA UP TO 1/2 OZ Controlled Substance % 4 FELONY POSSESSION OF COCAINE Controlled Substance % T-5 INTOXICATED AND DISRUPTIVE Public Order % % 19

21 3. Homeless, Not Veterans: Charge and Offense Statistics Table 3-1 details the distribution of charges by offense group which are attributable to homeless individuals in Mecklenburg County. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 3-1. Aggregated Charges by Offense Group Offense Group Offense (#) Offense (%) Public Order % Property % Controlled Substance % Person % Probation/Parole Violation % Traffic % Violent % Other % Sex % Domestic Violence % Murder / Manslaughter % DWI % 1, % Table 3-2 details the overall top five offenses attributable to homeless individuals in Mecklenburg County. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 3-2. Top 5 Offenses Overall Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) 1 SECOND DEGREE TRESPASS Public Order % 2 SOLICIT ALMS/BEG FOR MONEY Public Order % T-3 RESISTING PUBLIC OFFICER Public Order % T-3 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % 5 MISDEMEANOR LARCENY Property % Substance and Alcohol Use Table 3-3 shows the top five drug and alcohol-related charges among the Homeless, Not Veterans, in Table 3-3. Top 5 Drug and/or Alcohol Related Offenses % Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) 1 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % 2 POSSESS MARIJUANA UP TO 1/2 OZ Controlled Substance % 3 POSS/CONS BEER/WINE PUBLIC ST Public Order % 4 INTOXICATED AND DISRUPTIVE Public Order % 5 OPEN CONTAINER ALCOHOL VIOL Public Order % % 20

22 4. Homeless Veteran Analysis: Charge and Offense Statistics Table 4-1Error! Reference source not found. details the distribution of charges by offense group which are attributable to homeless veterans in Mecklenburg County. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 4-1. Aggregated Charges by Offense Group Offense Group Offense (#) Offense (%) Property % Public Order % Traffic % Controlled Substance % Person % Probation/Parole Violation % % Table 4-2 details the overall top five offenses attributable to homeless veterans in Mecklenburg County. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 4-2. Top 5 Offenses Rank Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) 1 SECOND DEGREE TRESPASS Public Order % T-2 OBTAIN PROPERTY FALSE PRETENSE Property % T-2 FINANCIAL CARD FRAUD (M) Property % 4 DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED Traffic % 5 POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % % Homeless Veteran Substance Abuse Statistics Table 4-3 details the top five drug and alcohol-related charges attributable to homeless veterans. These charges all related to bookings made in FY Table 4-3. Top 5 Drug and/or Alcohol Related Offenses Offense Rank Code Offense Description Offense Group Offenses (#) Offenses (%) DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED Traffic % POSSESS DRUG PARAPHERNALIA Controlled Substance % T POSS/CONS BEER/WINE PUBLIC ST Public Order % T FELONY POSSESSION SCH I CS Controlled Substance % T POSS/CON BEER/WINE UNAUTH PREM Public Order % % 21

23 5. Appendix A: Explanation of Statistical Analysis Analysis of Charges After compiling the descriptive statistics for each group of individuals, it was necessary to determine whether there was a statistical difference between the three groups with respect to the number of drug or alcohol related offenses. To do this, multiple tests 1 were conducted to compare the sample proportions of the three groups. The results indicate that there is insufficient statistical evidence to conclude that the sample proportions are different. Using the combined sample, we are able to construct a confidence interval to predict with 99% confidence that between 18% and 23% of all offenses charged to individuals who are veteran and/or homeless will be related to drugs and/or alcohol. Analysis of Individuals After compiling the descriptive statistics for each group of individuals, it was necessary to determine whether there was a statistical difference between the three groups with respect to the number of individuals with at least one drug or alcohol related offense. To do this, multiple tests were conducted to compare the sample proportions of the three groups. The results indicate that there is insufficient statistical evidence to conclude that the sample proportions are different. Using the combined sample, we are able to construct a confidence interval to predict with 99% confidence that the actual percentage of booked individuals with at least one drug and/or alcohol related offense is between 27% and 36% 2. 1 Specifically, two-tailed z-tests were conducted to test the following three hypotheses: 1) The proportions for veterans and homeless are equal; 2) The proportions for veterans and homeless veterans are equal, and; 3) The proportions for homeless and homeless veterans are equal. These tests found that, at alpha=.01, there was insufficient evidence to reject the null hypotheses that these proportions were equal. 2 It is important to note that this confidence interval only applies to booked individuals that are veteran and/or homeless. The validity of this interval to the general population cannot be guaranteed. 22

24 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Leake Topic of Interest #1: Designated Shower & Bathroom Facilities for the Homeless Explore the possibility of designating a location(s) for the homeless population to freshen up (baths/showers, etc.) Do other cities/counties provide this type of facility for the homeless? Response: The 2014 Point-In-Time Count (an annual single-day effort to determine the number of individuals who are homeless in Charlotte-Mecklenburg), recorded 2,014 people dealing with homelessness. It is a common problem for these individuals to have limited access to personal hygiene facilities, particularly restrooms. For example, most businesses require that a person must be a paying customer in order to use restroom facilities. Because individuals dealing with homelessness have limited financial means, they are not able to purchase items at businesses and access bathrooms. Showers are primarily provided at the Urban Ministry Center (UMC), The Salvation Army Center of Hope Women s Shelter, and The Men s Shelter of Charlotte. UMC is the only homeless services agency that provides shower facilities during the daytime hours between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. There does not appear to be a significant need for additional shower resources as guests of the shelters may utilize showers at any time during their overnight stay. Bathrooms are also available for use at the above mentioned service agencies but are not always easily accessible during the day. Individuals dealing with homelessness often go to the limited public restrooms that are available in the uptown area including the main Charlotte Mecklenburg Library, the Charlotte Transportation Center, and Harris Teeter grocery store. We ultimately know that the answer to homelessness is housing, but in the interim, vital basic needs such as clean bathrooms and shower facilities are important resources to provide for people continuing to deal with homelessness. Current Resources in Mecklenburg County The primary homeless services agencies that offer access to shower and restroom facilities are the Urban Ministry Center (UMC), the Salvation Army Center of Hope Women s Shelter, and The Men s Shelter of Charlotte (MSOC). Below is a brief summary of washing and refreshing resources each agency offers: The Urban Ministry Center (UMC) 945 N. College St The UMC is Charlotte s primary day services facility for men and women dealing with homelessness. The agency provides daily counseling, laundry, lunch, mail, and shower services for an average of 450 guests. UMC offers shower services Monday through Friday for its guests. They have four showers with 15 slots available for clients to sign-up during the morning and afternoon. Each person is allowed 15 minutes of shower time. On average between 40 and 50 individuals are able to take showers each weekday at the UMC. The UMC has five bathrooms that are available for use between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 23

25 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Leake Men s Shelter of Charlotte (MSOC) 12 N. Tryon St MSOC has showers available for guests but these may only be used during the evening after a person has checked-in or in the early morning. The building is closed from 7 a.m. each morning until 4 p.m. in the afternoon with the exception of 12 to 1 p.m. each day when lunch is served. They do not offer shower services during the day. They have bathrooms available for use though these would only be available when the building is open. Salvation Army Center of Hope Women s Shelter Spratt St The Salvation Army Center of Hope Women s Shelter has shower facilities available for its guests, but these options are not available during the day time hours. At the Women s Shelter all residents must leave the building by 9 a.m. and are able to return at 4 p.m. If an individual comes to the Women s Shelter to complete Coordinated Assessment, that individual may use the restroom during the time of their appointment. Coordinated Assessment is the process used in Charlotte-Mecklenburg to connect individuals who are homeless, or who are at risk of homelessness within 72 hours, to available shelter or housing. Public Restrooms The following public restrooms are available in the general uptown area: Charlotte Transportation Center (3 men s restrooms and 3 women s restrooms) Main Charlotte Mecklenburg Library (2 men s restrooms and 2 women s restrooms) Harris Teeter uptown (1 men s restroom and 1 women s restroom) Hearst Tower (1 men s restroom and 1 women s restroom) Founders Hall (1 men s restroom and 1 women s restroom) The Green (1 men s restroom and 1 women s restroom) Romare Bearden Park (1 men s restroom and 1 women s restroom) Responses in Other Communities Community responses to the problem of a lack of public restrooms and shower facilities for the homeless vary. The following provides examples from Portland, Oregon and Atlanta, Georgia. Portland, Oregon Perhaps the most innovative model for addressing the lack of public restrooms for the homeless is the use of stand-alone bathrooms known as Portland Loos. Portland Loos are simple, metallic flush toilet kiosks located in 7 different spots throughout the Portland community. The Loos are accessible 24 hours per day and are open to the general public. Portland Loos provide clean, safe, and environmentallyfriendly restroom facilities for all. The Portland Loos use solar-powered LED fixtures. 24

26 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Leake Ensuring safety and cleanliness can be a long-term problem for public restrooms. The Portland Loo is designed to prevent nefarious activity: To ensure occupants do not loiter and to help prevent excessive or extended use, the Loo has angled lower louvers to allow viewing of the floor, but that do not expose more than the occupant s feet. This design allows law enforcement, or others who may be monitoring the facility, to see a person's feet. If someone appears to be using the facility for an extended period of time, an officer can check on the person's safety. To ensure easy maintenance, the restroom is coated in a graffiti-proof coating. There is no running water inside, only a spigot for hand washing outside. The walls and doors are made from heavy-gauge stainless steel so they are not easily damaged. Cities in Texas, Alaska, California and Queen Victoria, Canada have purchased Portland Loos. Portland Loos are approximately $90,000 to purchase and $20,000 to maintain per year. Sidewalk Restrooms are reportedly more affordable alternatives though actual prices were not available. Atlanta, Georgia In an effort to address the need for additional public restrooms, Atlanta officials installed five Automatic Public Facilities (APFs) in their community. An automatic toilet is a pre-fabricated restroom with electrical and plumbing equipment fitted and ready for use. The seats are automatically sanitized after every use. Soap, water, and hand drying basins are sensor operated. APFs periodically receive a full cleaning according to a time schedule programmed by the City of Atlanta. The cost of installation and two year maintenance of the APF initiative totals $1.5 million dollars. To fund the project, the city drew from the Atlanta Development Authority s Homeless Opportunity Fund (HOF), part of their community effort to end chronic homelessness. Similar APFs are operated in the following communities: Seattle, Washington Boston, Maine Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania San Francisco, California New York City, New York Conclusions In Charlotte-Mecklenburg there does not appear to be a significant need for additional shower facilities as individuals staying at the Men s Shelter of Charlotte and the Salvation Army Center of Hope Women s Shelter are able to use these showers. During the day, individuals have access to the showers at the Urban Ministry Center. 25

27 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Leake However, Charlotte-Mecklenburg s homeless community, as well as the general public, may benefit from greater access to public bathroom facilities. As growth continues and more attractions and events draw people uptown, a study to determine whether to invest in this form of infrastructure to better support not only those who are dealing with homelessness, but our residents and visitors, may be needed. 26

28 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Leake Topic of Interest #2: Financial Assistance in Specific Geographic Locations Explore the feasibility of establishing an assistance program similar to High School Challenge with a modification that the funding would go directly to the families, instead of a 3 rd party such as Charlotte- Mecklenburg Schools. Parameters and requirements should be clearly defined to create the program but the funding/assistance should go directly to the family. Contextual Information The County provided Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) a 3 year $6 million grant to enhance educational and ancillary services to increase end-of-grade test scores at three low performing high schools. Commissioner Leake would like the County to consider taking a modified approach to the High School Challenge by giving the funds directly to the families that reside in the same geographic location as the 3 high schools that participated in the High School Challenge. The following are the 3 schools selected to participate in the High School Challenge in FY2005 and FY2006: Garinger; West Charlotte; and, West Mecklenburg Response According to the County s legal office, there is no authority that allows the County to provide income directly to families in a specific geographic location of the County. The Federal TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) program, administered by the Department of Social Services is a meansbased (i.e. determined by income) program that provides funding assistance to families. However, this program is not focused on any specific geographic area within the County such as a school district. Nonprofits often provide services that impact specific areas of the County. It may be possible to work with a non-profit to focus their services in a struggling school district. Communities in Schools and Freedom School Partners are two nonprofits that provide services that can help students and families who are struggling in school. Communities in Schools provides dropout prevention, college access and career readiness, support for teen mothers, and working with youthful offenders to help them pursue their education. Freedom School Partners provides summer programs that bridge the gap over summer break and help children improve reading. There may be other non-profits that could potential address needs in these communities. In addition to the County not having the authority to provide income directly to families in a specific part of the County, the following are a few more concerns that should be considered: Fairness defining a program that targeted a specific geography in the County could be perceived as unfair by some residents, especially to citizen in another part of the County in similar economic situations. Define the goal and timeframe if the County had the authority to create an assistance program that targets a specific geographic location, it should clearly define the goals and timeframe. If the ultimate goal is to improve quality of life, then this would likely be a long-term investment. 27

29 2015 Board Annual Retreat County Commissioner s Topic of Interest Submitted by: Commissioner Leake Accountability There would need to be a great deal of oversight to ensure that funds were spent in a manner that met the intended goals. Administration - Such a program would require a significant level of administration, both to address accountability and to verify applicants met the prerequisite. Needs Assessment- It is very likely that each family that reside in the geographic location of the high school challenge is coping with unique social obstacles. Therefore, a needs assessment is recommended to determine what obstacles are faced by these communities so that the response matches the need. Return on the Investment $6 million (funding amount for High School Challenge) divided by each family in the district may not amount to enough money to meaningfully address the families individual situation. For example, mathematically based on an equal distribution, a geographic area consisting of 10,000 families would receive a one-time benefit in the amount of $600 based on the high school challenge funding amount ($6M). Focusing the same funding on a known obstacle for the residents in that same geographical area is likely to have better results for the community as a whole. The following are programs that currently exist related to the inquiry: Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) This is the only program that provides direct income, but this is a means-based program that anyone could apply for who meets the federal qualifications. Freedom Schools This is a nonprofit organization that provides assistance to students in middle and elementary school. They often focus on providing a bridge for learning over the summer months. A site and funding to establish a summer program in an area is required. Communities in School This nonprofit provides assistance to students and families such as those list on the website: o School-based dropout prevention at the elementary, middle, and high school levels; o College access and career readiness programming; o Support for teen mothers balancing the challenge of childcare and high school graduation; and o Working with youthful offenders to help them pursue their education 28

30 High School Challenge Update December 13, 2005 Garinger Jo Ella Ferrell West Charlotte John Modest West Mecklenburg Charity Bell 29

31 Approval Timeline for High School Challenge September 14, 2004 Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of Education approved High School Challenge proposal November 3, 2004 Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners approved High School Challenge proposal Program Highlights for Advertisement and hiring of positions outlined in the HSC proposal Behavior Management Technicians Dean of Students Campus Security Associates Technology Coordinator Permanent Substitutes Truant Officers 30

32 Program Highlights for Contract with Communities in Schools (CIS) Think College Program Tutoring in End-of-Course Testing Memorandum of Understanding with Department of Social Services DSS/CMS Liaisons CIS Services Coordinate personal adult advocate Develop and coordinate student recognition program highlighting Achievement Attendance Volunteerism Citizenship Coordinate academic tutoring Coordinate college and career awareness programs Refer students for dental and vision services 31

33 Community in Schools - Students Served CIS served 386 active and 10 inactive students 125 students at Garinger 147 students at West Charlotte 124 students at West Mecklenburg Program Highlights for Professional development for principals Flynn Heath Coaching Model Professional development for teachers PEAK Performance Excellence for All Kids Academic Content Coach Model 32

34 Program Highlights for Truancy Program Truant Officers 3 hired Truancy Centers 2 opened Link with Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department Truancy Center Program Truancy Center Offered Small class size Individualized attention Different peer environment 33

35 Truancy Program Students Served From mid-january to the end of school 377 students picked up at least once 571 total pick-ups Number of Pick-ups Number of Students Total 377 Program Highlights for Pay for Performance Pilot Achievement of EOC targets Attendance less than 4 days absent 30 hours of professional development 34

36 Pay for Performance Results Garinger 32 Certified staff (25%) 13 Non Certified staff (41%) West Charlotte 24 Certified Staff (21%) 21 Non Certified Staff (62%) West Mecklenburg 14 Certified (12%) 7 Non Certified (21%) EOC Student Achievement Results Net Gain/Loss Garinger West Charlotte West Mecklenburg

37 Budget Update Allocation $6,000, Expenditures Carryover $2,657, $3,342, New Allocation $3,600, Budget $6,942, Personnel Adjustments for Elimination of Professional Development Specialist Elimination of Family Advocate Coordinator Position Addition of 12 full-time Academic Content Coaches Addition of 9 End-of-Course Teachers Addition of 3 Play It Smart Academic Coaches Addition of 1 High School Challenge Coordinator Addition of 1 full-time PBIS Coach Addition of 1 Technology Teacher 36

38 Program Adjustments for Health Program 1 Nurse Practitioner 1 Registered Nurse per school 1 Medical Doctor backup for Nurse Practitioner 1 hour per week SAT Support Program Expansion of Truancy Program with Additional Truancy Officers and Centers Truancy Program Centers Methodist Home Recreation Amay James Recreation Center Albemarle Road Recreation Center Program Adjustments for Transportation for Extended Day Programs Tutorials Saturday Academy 37

39 Student Achievement Targets for Target Actual Target Garinger West Charlotte West Mecklenburg