Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (8)
Similar to The 2009 Sex Offender Registration & Management Conference
Similar to The 2009 Sex Offender Registration & Management Conference (20)
More from performanceweb
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The 2009 Sex Offender Registration & Management Conference
- 1. www.EndSexCrimes.org Work Together to Provide the Latest Prevention, Response and Notification Techniques You Will Learn to: Leverage Resources to Improve Oversight of Agency Requirements Maintain compliance withThe Adam Walsh Act and other legislative trends while seeking new funding sources for your agency Strengthen Online Monitoring and Investigation Practices Learn the latest techniques to examine and combat the rise of internet sex crimes Improve Communication Strategies and Public Awareness Identify and monitor emerging threats in your community to manage high risk offenders Improve Sex Offender Monitoring and Registry Management Enhance public safety by effectively managing sex offender data quality and integrity Improve Response through Interagency and Community Collaboration February 26–27, 2009 | Orlando, FL Pre-Conference Workshop: February 25, 2009 Post-Conference Workshop: February 27, 2009 Featuring Four Tracks: • High Risk Sex Offenders • Emergent Issues in Sex Offender Management • Online Threat Management • Registration and Monitoring Management www.EndSexCrimes.org Registration & Management Conference Offender Sex The 2009
- 3. If you have additional questions or requests for information beyond what is contained in this document book, please feel free to contact us at any time. The Performance Institute 1515 N. Courthouse Road, Suite 600 Arlington, VA 22201 Tel: 703-894-0481 Fax: 703-894-0482 Info@PerformanceWeb.org www.PerformanceWeb.org
- 5. What kinds of information will I find on the website Officer.com? • The latest news in law enforcement, updated several times each business day by a dedicated news staff • New feature articles every day on topics ranging from officer survival to police family life • All articles written by subject matter experts, most of them active or retired law enforcement officers • Comprehensive job listings for both sworn and non-sworn positions • A discussion forum with over 38,000 registered members • An events calendar of training sessions, fund-raisers, social gatherings, and other events with no listing fees • Archives of all articles appearing in Law Enforcement Technology magazine • Free e-mail bulletins of daily news and feature articles, officer down reports, and new job listings • Free yourname@officermail.com e-mail accounts • Web directories of law enforcement agencies and online resources for police Officer.com does its best to live up to our motto, ”The Source for Law Enforcement.” From this page, a mouse click or two will bring you the latest news, job listings, ongoing discussions on every topic of interest to police, and original articles, available nowhere else, all written by our carefully selected contributors. No one writes for Officer.com unless they have walked the walk and know what they’re writing about first hand. Each article and news story is written for the busy professional who doesn’t have a lot of time to read, so we get to the good stuff right away. If you’ve got five minutes until your next meeting or to finish your coffee before you go back on the road, call up the Officer.com home page and we’ll have something there that you’ll find at least interesting, and hopefully valuable. Roll call sergeants can always find an article or news story to use as the foundation for a few minutes of in-service training. Officer.com is the only online resource you need to keep informed and ready to deal with the next incident you are called to handle, on the job or in your home life. w w w. o ff i c e r. c o m
- 7. The 2009 Sex Offender Registration Management Conference February 25, 2009 8:30 Workshop Registration Continental Breakfast 9:00 Workshop A: Sex Offender Risk Assessment Amy Phenix Clinical Psychologist 12:00 Lunch Break 1:00 Workshop A: Sex Offender Risk Assessment Continued 4:00 Workshop A Adjourns February 26, 2009 7:30 Conference Registration Continental Breakfast 8:00 Keynote Address: Preparing for the Future: The Adam Walsh Act Patrick Lynch Attorney General State of Rhode Island 9:00 Interactive Dialogue: SORNA-Steps for Being Compliant Panel Discussion 10:00 Break Refreshments 10:15 Track A: High Risk Sex Offenders Strategize to Work with Offenders Not Under Supervision AnnMarie Stroshane O'Neill Senior State Program Administrator Supervisor Predatory Offender Registration Unit Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Track B: Emergent Issues in Sex Offender Management Effective Management of Juvenile Sex Offenders Dr. Nancy Calley Comprehensive Juvenile Sex Offender Management Initiative University of Detroit-Mercy 11:30 Lunch Break 12:30 Track A: High Risk Sex Offenders
- 8. Handle Volatile and High Risk Offenders Greg Brown Chief Probation Officer, Twentieth Judicial District Boulder, Colorado Track B: Emergent Issues in Sex Offender Management Overcome Challenges with Offenders in Tribal Nations 1:45 Break Refreshments 2:00 Track A: High Risk Sex Offenders Enhance Supervision of Sex Offenders Bill Bonsall Santa Clara County Probation Track B: Emergent Issues in Sex Offender Management Monitor Sex Offenders in the Armed Services John F Plansky Parole and Release Director Naval Consolidated Brig Miramar 3:15 Apprehension of Fugitive Sex Offenders by the US Marshal Service William Sorukas Chief Inspector, Domestic Investigations United States Marshals Service 4:15 Adjourn February 27, 2009 7:30 Continental Breakfast 8:00 Interagency and Community Collaboration: The Winning Move Jerry Eitniear Bureau Administrator, Community Corrections Arizona Department of Corrections Nicole Studer Community Correctional Manager Arizona Department of Corrections 9:00 Track C: Online Threat Management Implement Internet Monitoring Tips, Techniques and Tools Troy Lawrence Digital Forensic Lab Fort Worth Police Department Track D: Registration and Monitoring Management
- 9. Strategy for Tracking Sex Offender Movements Lt. Samuel F. Izzarelli Jr. Commanding Officer State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety Division of State Police Sex Offender Registry Unit/DNA Collection Unit 10:00 Break Refreshments 10:15 Track C: Online Threat Management Web 2.0 and Beyond: How Social Networking has Impacted Sex Offender Management Sgt. Bill Dehart Colorado Springs Police Department Computer Forensics/Internet Crimes Against Children/Registered Sex Offender Unit Colorado Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Track D: Registration and Monitoring Management Assess the Impact of Residency Restrictions Dr. Leo Cotter Former Prison Psychologist 11:15 Track C: Online Threat Management Protect Children from Online Predators Bill Bonsall Santa Clara County Probation Track D: Registration and Monitoring Management Improve the Accuracy of Sex Offender Registry Data Lt. Samuel F. Izzarelli Jr. Commanding Officer State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety Division of State Police Sex Offender Registry Unit/DNA Collection Unit 12:15 Lunch Break/Conference Adjourns 1:15 Workshop B: Grants Management, the Winning Move: Identify, Write and Secure Grants for Your Agency Lt. Tim Kradas Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs
- 11. 1 Event Contact Information Colleen E. O’Rourke Director Law Enforcement Development Center 703.894.0481 Orourke@PerformanceWeb.org
- 12. 2 Our Mission The Performance Institute is a private think tank that seeks to improve government performance through the principles of competition, accountability, performance and transparency. As the nation’s leading authority on government performance, we are a major source of thought leadership and a repository for best practices. Our mission is to define, develop and disseminate leading government performance innovations and to identify “best-in-class” government performance management solutions. 5544332211PROGRAMPROGRAM AREASAREAS “Implementation of Performance Initiatives” Results-based performance management implementation support at the Agency, Program or Group levels. “Accreditation of Personnel and Programs” Comprehensive Education, Assessment and Certification of Individuals and Programs Based on Latest Performance Standards “Competency Building” In-House and Public Offered Training Based on Skills Required for the Latest Government Mandates and Management Initiatives “Exchange of Best Practices” National Summits that Explore Emerging Challenges, Share Best Practices, and Emerging Mandates in Each Government Function Mission “Thought Leadership” Best Practice Reports, White Papers, e- Newsletters and Performance Measurement Databases Improving Government Performance From Strategy Design…to Strategy Execution Training Certification Consulting Conferences Forums Research How The Institute Works Through best practice research, national conferences, hands-on training programs, and strategic consulting services, the Institute provides cutting-edge expertise in the design, implementation and evaluation of strategies to solve operational challenges and enhance organizational performance.
- 13. 3 RESEARCH Answering the Call Quarterly e-journal for law enforcement and first responders Provides an in-depth look at today’s hottest issues, including law enforcement management, recruitment and retention, emergency preparedness, use of force, funding and grants, and technological innovations Visit our website and stay current on the latest issues in law enforcement! CONFERENCES Conferences and Summits 2-3 day events with expert presentations and case studies allowing for the exchange of best practices on policy and management issues Webinars Issue-specific sessions for targeted audiences 90 min sessions with expert speakers (Webinars are Held at Institute Headquarters) A complete listing of upcoming events is maintained on our website.
- 14. 4 TRAINING 180 Public-Offered Training Courses Annually (10,000 Attendees) Taught by Leading Practitioners and Featuring Practical Case Studies/Simulations Comprehensive Coverage of Management Issues Facing Government Content Updated to Reflect Latest Compliance Mandates Review a Full Roster of Courses and Certification Programs on the Website. • Acquisition and Competition • Financial Management • Executive Leadership • Administrative Management • Performance Management • Human Resources • Information Technology • Project Management 8 Certification Programs…Featuring 60 High-Impact Courses Conference Logistics • Customer Service Requests – Invoices and Receipts – Requests for Documents/Speaker materials – Questions, comments, and suggestions – E-Mail: Orourke@PerformanceWeb.org
- 15. 5
- 17. ATTORNEY GENERAL PATRICK C. LYNCH Sworn into a second term of office on January 2, 2007, Patrick C. Lynch, 43, became the 72nd person to hold the office of Rhode Island Attorney General since its inception in 1650. A former State prosecutor, he has made reducing juvenile crime the centerpiece of his administration, believing that the career criminals of tomorrow start off as the youth offenders of today. “No serious discussion about Rhode Island’s quality of life or economic health can exclude issues such as bullying, truancy, school violence, and the accessibility of guns in our communities,” he says. Since taking office, Attorney General Lynch has had a strong voice in the shaping of legislation aimed at toughening the state’s criminal justice system, advancing the rights of victims, and affording additional protections to consumers. Attorney General Lynch has visited at least a school a week — making hundreds of such visits since first taking office in January 2003 — to speak to children about making good choices in their lives. “Talking to kids in their classrooms is much better than prosecuting them in our courtrooms,” he tells parent and teacher groups. He has also been an unwavering advocate for the Rhode Island Judiciary’s anti-truancy and anti- drug initiatives, the Truancy and Drug Courts. In August 2004, the New England Association of Drug Court Professionals presented Attorney General Lynch with its President’s Award for his “support of drug courts and their graduates.” Through his “Toy Gun Bash” program, Lynch has stressed the importance of gun-safety awareness throughout Rhode Island. He has emphasized community prosecution, pairing a State prosecutor with the Rhode Island State Police and each of Rhode Island’s 38 municipal police departments, as well as with the personnel of each of the Providence Police Department’s nine precincts, to ensure timely and effective prosecution of “quality of life” crimes such as breaking and entering, larceny, assault, robbery, and drug- related offenses. In response to an increase in the number of crimes committed against senior citizens in Rhode Island, which has one of the nation’s highest concentrations of the elderly, Lynch established, in 2005, a specialized Elder Abuse Unit within the Department of Attorney General. The Unit’s primary functions are investigating reports of alleged exploitation of seniors and prosecuting crimes involving elderly victims of abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation. Committed to championing the civil liberties of all Rhode Islanders, Lynch created, with legislative approval, the Attorney General’s Office of Civil Rights Advocate in 2005. This specialized unit empowers the Attorney General to be more proactive in protecting the rights of Rhode Islanders from civil rights violations involving race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, and age. Lynch took the lead in defeating efforts to site an LNG facility in Providence and has joined with anti-LNG forces in nearby Fall River, Massachusetts, where another facility — also requiring marine transport of LNG through Rhode Island waters and along its coastal communities — has been proposed. Stating that safety and security measures are inadequate to protect the public, the infrastructure, and the environment, he continues to advocate for the sovereign rights of states against the unwanted introduction of LNG terminals. Attorney General Lynch’s leadership on important legal and social issues has earned him the respect of his peers throughout the nation. It was while hosting the National Association of Attorneys General’s (NAAG) 2008 Summer Meeting in Rhode Island that Lynch was inducted as President of NAAG. His election marks the first time a Rhode Island Attorney General has been chosen to serve in NAAG’s top leadership position. In selecting The Year of the Child as his presidential initiative while serving as NAAG President, Attorney General Lynch is intent on furthering protections for youth, including increasing safeguards in the area of technology such as those attained by recent agreements with attorneys general and social networking sites, as well as the nation’s cable operators. -MORE-
- 18. ATTORNEY GENERAL PATRICK C. LYNCH PAGE 2 A focus of The Year of the Child initiative involves advancing the momentum to establish Dating Violence Education in every state in the nation. In 2007, the Lindsay Ann Burke Act, a bill proposed by Attorney General Lynch in concert with Lindsay’s parents, Ann and Chris Burke, was passed into law in Rhode Island. The new law, named in memory of a victim of dating violence, mandates that dating violence education be incorporated into the existing health education curriculum, for middle and high school students, in each public school district of the state. It further mandates that each school district adopt a zero tolerance policy and establish guidelines and discipline procedures to respond to any dating violence issues taking place at school, or on school grounds. All Rhode Island school districts must have their policies in place by December 1, 2008. Beginning in 2007, Attorney General Lynch and Ann and Chris Burke have participated in national events sponsored by Liz Claiborne Inc. to promote dating abuse education, through Liz Claiborne Inc.’s “It’s Time to Talk Day” Love is Not Abuse program. On December 2, 2008, they will join with Liz Claiborne as it launches Moms and Dads for Education (MADE) to Stop Teen Dating Abuse, a nationwide coalition of parents, teachers, and citizens advocating for teen dating abuse education legislation around the country. At NAAG’s 2008 Summer Meeting in Providence, Attorney General Lynch and Nebraska’s Attorney General Jon Bruning sponsored a Resolution in support of teen dating violence education that was unanimously adopted. On November 6, 2008, while representing NAAG on a National Bar Association panel at Georgetown University Law Center, Attorney General Lynch proposed Dating Violence Education as a juvenile justice priority for the new administration. And on November 21, 2008, the National Foundation for Women Legislators’ (NFWL) National Policy Committee on Crime, Justice, Terrorism, and Substance Abuse introduced and passed a Resolution on teen dating abuse education at its annual conference in Sarasota, Florida. A 1987 graduate of Brown University, Attorney General Lynch earned his law degree from Suffolk University Law School. As a Special Assistant Attorney General from 1994 to 1999, he prosecuted cases at every level of Rhode Island’s criminal justice system and led the State’s prosecution of gang-related offenses. Lynch worked for one of Rhode Island’s top law firms until the 2002 election, which capped his first campaign for public office. # # #
- 23. AnnMarie O’Neill’s Biography AnnMarie O’Neill has worked for the State of Minnesota since 1994. She started her career as a student worker in the Sex Offender Registration unit at the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA). In 1995, AnnMarie earned a Bachelor’s degree in Sociology and Criminal Justice from the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, MN. Upon graduation, AnnMarie accepted a position with the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office as an investigator in the Licensing Investigations section. In 1999, AnnMarie returned to the BCA as the Senior State Program Administrator Supervisor for the Predatory Offender Registration (POR) Unit. AnnMarie supervises 15 non-sworn staff members and is responsible for the daily operations in the POR Unit. AnnMarie is actively involved in drafting legislative initiatives and providing testimony at the legislature related to registration issues. AnnMarie provides state-wide training on registration policies and procedures to law enforcement and corrections officials as well as citizen groups and inmates in correctional facilities. In 2002, AnnMarie earned a Master’s degree in Public Safety Administration and Education from the University of St. Thomas.
- 25. 1 Strategies for Improving Registration Compliance AnnMarie S. O’Neill Senior State Program Administrator Supervisor Predatory Offender Registration (POR) Unit Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) February 26, 2009 Minnesota Registrants as of 2/9/2009 • Registered 14,832 • Completed 3,134 • Inactivated 1,510 • Deceased 797 • Deleted 798 • In Progress 325 Total in Database: 21,396 Notes: • Inactivated offenders no longer have a primary or secondary residence in Minnesota and no longer work or attend school in Minnesota. They are not required to report updates to the Minnesota Registry unless they re-enter Minnesota prior to the end of their registration period. • Deleted files relate to offenders who were registered in error, offenders whose convictions have been reversed or vacated and offenders who were registered under multiple names.
- 26. 2 Breakdown of 14,832 Active Registrants • Primary Address in Community 10,413 • Incarcerated 3,439 • Civilly Committed 522 • Deported 395 • Homeless 63 Compliance Rate • Compliant Registrants: 13,996 (94.4%) • Non-Compliant Registrants: 836 (5.6%)
- 27. 3 Breakdown of Non-Compliant Registrants • Failed to Return Verification Letter: 348 (42%) • Verification Letter Returned By USPS: 291 (35%) • Random Compliance Check: 129 (15%) • Deported Before Registering: 27 (3.2%) • Homeless/Didn’t Rpt Weekly Check-In: 18 (2.1%) • Refused to Sign Forms: 10 (1.2%) • Absconded from Supervision: 13 (1.5%) 836 (100%) Compliance Strategy #1: Partner With Local Law Enforcement and Corrections It goes without saying that local law enforcement and corrections are essential to the success of any registration program. The MN BCA has 5 Special Agents and 1 Senior Special Agent assigned to geographic regions within Minnesota. Every police department and sheriff’s office in Minnesota has designated at least one contact person for the purposes of registration.
- 28. 4 The BCA partners with local law enforcement, corrections, the DOC Fugitive Unit and the U.S. Marshals to monitor and track non-compliant registrants. The BCA is the central repository for all registration information in Minnesota. The BCA maintains and provides access to a secure website where law enforcement and corrections officials can get real-time registration information including lists and maps of registrants in a geographic region. This site is available 24 hours per day/7 days per week.
- 29. 5
- 30. 6
- 31. 7 Compliance Strategy #2: Partner With the Community Post Non-Compliant Registrants on Public Website www.por.state.mn.us • Registrants must be 16 years of age or older and non- compliant for 30 days or longer before posting. • Complete 11 step checklist before posting. • As of 2/9/2009 there are 701 non-compliant registrants posted on the public website. Launched on 10/18/2006 • 153,525 visits to website Solicit Tips from the Public • 286 tips from the public
- 32. 8
- 33. 9
- 34. 10 Added Benefits • Frequently Asked Questions Section. • Links to surrounding states and national registry websites. • Links to other Internet resources. • Cost effective place to refer both citizens and registrants.
- 35. 11 Compliance Strategy #3: Partner With the Private Sector For the last two years, ClearChannel has donated four billboards to advertise the BCA non-compliant website. The billboards rotate around the metro area on a regular basis.
- 36. 12 Compliance Strategy #4: Partner With the County Jails New legislation effective 8/1/2008. All Minnesota jails are required to incorporate a check of the POR secure website in their booking process. Checking NCIC wants/warrants does NOT satisfy this requirement, as not all registrants result in an NCIC hit. Jails are required to notify the BCA, via an on-line reporting feature, of all registrants who are booked into the jail for any offense. Jails are required to have registrants complete a Change of Information form prior to release, even if the registrant is returning to the last registered address. Jails can upload new photos of registrants directly into the POR database every time a registrant is taken into custody.
- 37. 13 Mandatory Check of POR Database During Jail Intake Process 641.05 RECORD OF INMATES; RETURN TO COURT; BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION. (a) Every sheriff shall, at the expense of the county, maintain a permanent record of all persons committed to any jail under the sheriff's charge. It shall contain the name of every person committed, by what authority, residence, date of commitment, and, if for a criminal offense, a description of the person, when and by what authority liberated, and, in case of escape, the time and manner thereof. At the opening of each term of district court the sheriff shall make a certified transcript from the record to such the court, showing all cases therein not previously disposed of. (b) Upon intake into the jail facility, the name of the committed person shall be checked against the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension predatory offender registration database to determine whether the person is a registered predatory offender. In the event that the person is registered, the sheriff or designee shall notify the bureau of the person's admission into the jail facility. At the time of discharge from the facility, the sheriff or designee shall provide the person with a change of information form for the purposes of reporting the address where the person will be living upon release from the facility. (c) Every sheriff who intentionally neglects or refuses to so report under paragraph (a) or (b) shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2008, and applies to crimes committed on or after that date. The full text of HF 2996 can be found at https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H2996.4.htmlsession=ls85
- 38. 14 Unexpected Results • Since 8/1/2008 (six months), the BCA has received 2,962 reports of registrants being booked into a Minnesota jail. (Unexpected, but manageable increase in POR Unit workload.) • 239 of the reports related to registrants known to be non- compliant. • Cooperation from jail staff has been exceptional! • Each jail administrator was personally contacted by a BCA POR Unit summer intern several weeks before the law took effect. The legislation and process was explained in detail and followed up by an email with step- by-step instructions. Implementation was quick and easy.
- 39. 15 Additional Benefits • Better accuracy for historical address information and future investigative queries. • More frequently updated photographs of registrants. • Impact on defense strategies in Failure to Register cases. • Increased opportunity for registrants to report address changes/prevention of future non-compliance. Compliance Strategy #5: Partner With the SMART Office • How will the Adam Walsh Act verification requirements impact Minnesota’s compliance rate? Increased verification frequency. In-person verification requirements vs. current mail- based system. Fiscal and human resource impact on local law enforcement agencies.
- 40. 16 Estimated Yearly Verifications Conducted via U.S. Mail • Primary Address in Community 10,413 X 1 = 10,413 • Incarcerated 3,439 X 0 = 0 • Civilly Committed 522 X 4 = 2,088 • Deported 395 X 0 = 0 • Homeless 63 X 1 = 63 Total Number of Yearly Paper Verifications = 12,564 Note • Homeless offenders are sent one paper Verification each year. The letter is mailed to the offender in c/o of the law enforcement agency where they complete their weekly, in-person check-ins. Estimated Yearly Verifications Conducted via In-Person Meeting With Local Law Enforcement • Homeless 63 X 52 Weekly Check Ins = 3,276 • Level 2 and Level 3 offenders who are not under correctional supervision and who are living in the community in MN 444 X 1 Yearly Meeting = 444 Total Number of In-Person Verifications = 3,720
- 41. 17 Estimated Tier Level Assignments for MN Registrants • Tier Level One 2,210 • Tier Level Two 4,676 • Tier Level Three 5,477 • Unknown, Assume Tier One for Conservative Estimate 5,535* Estimated Yearly In-Person Verifications Pursuant to AWA 39,005** Notes: *The Minnesota Registry can not currently project the Tier Level assignments for over 5,535 registrants due to their offenses occurring in other states or having insufficient conviction information on file. **Does not include Weekly Check Ins for homeless registrants. ***Statistics as of 1/15/2009. Challenges • Converting from a predominately paper based verification system coordinated at the state level, to a in-person verification system handled at the local law enforcement level. • Maintaining the benefits of utilizing the United States Postal Service (mail forwarding, death notification and new address notification) while implementing a new in-person verification process. • Reducing the fiscal and human resources impact at the local level. • Managing the data entry and increased volume of paperwork generated by the increased frequency of verifications for most registrants.
- 42. 18 Goals • Reduce amount of time local law enforcement must spend for each in-person verification from 20 minutes to 5 minutes. • Reduce the amount of data entry necessary for Registry personnel. • Utilize technology, specifically the Internet and biometric identifiers. • Reduce paper and move toward an image based system that allows for electronic storage and sharing of documentation. Limitations • Not all registrants have access to the Internet. • Some registrants are restricted from accessing the Internet as condition of their supervision. • Legislation is needed before electronic signatures or biometric identifiers can be utilized and accepted; therefore, Phase One still requires submission of a signed paper document after the on-line verification process is completed.
- 43. 19 Minnesota Grant Request Federal Request: $207,273.02 State In-Kind Match: $69,091.00 Total Phase One Cost: $276,364.02 Minnesota Address Verification Project • Modify the existing verification programming to generate a Verification letter and PIN number at intervals consistent with the AWA Tier Level assignment. • Upon receipt of the verification letter and PIN, the registrant will log onto a web site to complete his/her Verification form and Duty to Register. • The registrant will submit his/her Verification form and Duty to Register on-line. The registrant will be instructed to print the on-line document and report to local law enforcement within a set number of days. The updates submitted by the registrant will be held in a queue at the BCA until the signed document is received during the in-person verification with local law enforcement (Phase One) or until the offender submits his/her fingerprints via a two finger identification unit (Phase Two).
- 44. 20 Benefits • Receipt of the PIN number mailing will prompt the registrant to complete the on-line verification process and complete the in-person verification. Local law enforcement will receive an electronic schedule identifying which registrants they should anticipate meeting with during a particular time frame. • Data entry will be completed by the registrant and Registry staff will only need to review and accept the information after it has been released from the queue. Registry staff will not have to decipher hand writing. • The submission of incomplete Verification forms will be eliminated because registrants will be prompted to complete missing information during the on-line process. Benefits • On-line completion of the actual Verification form and Duty to Register will greatly reduce the amount of time needed during each in-person verification meeting. • Maintaining a limited mailing component in the verification process is desirable due to logistical and investigative benefits. • Placing verification information in an on-line queue and then storing it electronically, will allow the Minnesota Registry to easily share verification materials with other states. • The addition of the in-person meeting allows law enforcement to authenticate that the registrant was actually responsible for completing and returning the Verification form. • Successful implementation of this process will lead to additional on- line capabilities for handling initial Registrations and routine Changes of Information.
- 45. 21
- 46. 22
- 47. 23 Two Finger Rapid ID Unit • Phase Two of the Project will incorporate biometric technology. • During the in-person verification process, the registrant’s identity would be confirmed and his/her on-line verification information would be released from the queue. • This process will eliminate the need for a signed document and help the BCA move toward a paperless registration system.
- 48. 24 Contact Information Policy and Procedure Issues AnnMarie S. O’Neill annmarie.oneill@state.mn.us Phone: (651)793-7073 Technology and Programming Issues Walt Cygan walter.cygan@state.mn.us Phone: (651)793-2492
- 49. Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension 1430 Maryland Avenue East St. Paul, MN 55106 Agreement to Participate in Verification Pilot Project POR ID Number First Name Initial Last Name Address Line 1 Address Line 2 City, State, Zip Code I agree to participate in the BCA POR Unit Verification Pilot Project. My participation in this project is completely voluntary. I understand that I will not be compensated for participating in this project. I understand that I will receive a Personal Identification Number (PIN) during the week of February 23, 2009. I understand I will use this PIN number to access a secure web site and review and update my registration information. I understand that I will be required to complete the on-line verification process no later than March 4, 2009. I also understand that because this is a pilot project, I will still need to print the on-line Verification form and mail it to the BCA to satisfy my annual Verification requirements. I understand that any changes or updates I make on the on-line web site will not be accepted by the BCA until I return a signed copy of the document I print from the secure web site. I understand that participation in this pilot project will satisfy my verification requirement. I agree to complete a short survey after using the web site to provide feedback to the BCA regarding the on-line verification process. I understand that information that I provide in the survey will be used to enhance the project and make modifications to the web site. I understand that feedback that I provide may be used in a federal grant report. I further understand that none of my personal identifiers will be shared in any grant reports or presentations. I do not have an assigned corrections agent and I am not prohibited from using the Internet. OR My assigned corrections agent is: _____________________________________________ Name of Corrections Agency: ________________________________________________ Telephone Number: ________________________________________________________ Signature of Assigned Corrections Agent: _______________________ Date:__________ Participant’s Signature: __________________________________ Date: _____________ Please return this document to BCA in the enclosed envelope no later than February 18, 2009
- 50. February 2, 2009 First Name Initial Last Name Address Line 1 Address Line 2 City, State, Zip Code Re: Verification Letter Pilot Project Dear First Name Last Name, The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), Predatory Offender Registration (POR) Unit, is the recipient of a federal grant which is being used to fund a pilot project related to the annual verification process. The goal of the project is to allow for on-line data-entry by registrants to satisfy their verification requirements. If you agree to participate in the pilot project, you will receive a Personal Identification Number (PIN) and instructions related to updating your registration information on the Internet. The instructions and PIN will replace the paper Verification form you usually receive. The BCA POR Unit has created a secure web site where you will be able to access your registration information. The site will prompt you to verify that your primary address, secondary address, employment, school and vehicle information is accurate. The site will also allow you to make corrections or changes to your existing registration information. One of the advantages of the system will be the ability of the registrant to print a copy of the information submitted to the BCA. The print- out will include a receipt with a date and time stamp indicating when the registrant completed the on- line updates. You have been identified as a potential participant in the testing phase of this project because you are scheduled to receive your annual Verification letter during the week of February 23, 2009. If you are interested in participating in the pilot project, please complete the enclosed form and return it in the postage-paid envelope provided. If you do not return the form, you will not be included in the study and you will receive the regular paper Verification form during the week of February 23, 2009. Please note, if you are currently under supervision, you must obtain the signature of your assigned corrections agent before participating in the project. If the conditions of your supervision prohibit you from accessing the Internet or if you do not have access to the Internet, you should not participate in this project. You must respond no later than February 18, 2009, in order to participate. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Predatory Offender Registration Unit Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Enclosure
- 51. Nancy G. Calley, Ph.D., LPC is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Counseling and Addiction Studies at the University of Detroit Mercy and the Clinical Director of Spectrum Human Services, Inc. Affiliated Companies. Dr. Calley’s publications and primary research involves the assessment, clinical treatment, and management of juvenile sex offenders. In addition to her scholarly publications, she has developed a comprehensive web- based training curriculum on the various aspects of juvenile sex offending that is now available at no-cost to law enforcement, other professionals, and interested individuals at www.cjsom.com In 2006, Dr. Calley was the recipient of a Bureau of Justice grant to lead a comprehensive system-wide improvement project for juvenile sex offenders in Wayne county, Michigan. The improvement plan was fully implemented in 2008. Currently, she is leading another multi-project federal grant aimed at evaluating and improving residential treatment for juvenile sex offenders. Dr. Calley’s other related publications and research focuses on applied ethics with mandated clients, the prevention and treatment of adolescent depression, and comprehensive clinical program development.
- 53. 1 Wayne County Comprehensive Juvenile Sex Offender Management Initiative: New Directions in Juvenile Sex Offender Management Nancy G. Calley, Ph.D., LPC Project Research Coordinator University of Detroit Mercy Spectrum Human Services, Inc. Affiliated Companies About the Initiative Initial Funding: Bureau of Justice – Initial CSOM funding for 2 yr planning implementation Scope of Project: Assessment Analysis (Phase I), and Implementation (Phase II) Timeframes: January, 2007 – September, 2007: Assessment Analysis Completed October, 2007 – April, 2008: Implementation Plan Development May, 2008 Beyond: Implementation Collaborative Team: Prosecutor, Jurists, County officials, governmental private agencies, local state police sheriff, Victim’s Rights, Children’s Hospital, adjunctive service providers
- 54. 2 About the Region • Most populous co. in Michigan; 2.1 million • Detroit, 3rd most dangerous city (2007) • JJ system administered by Co w/probation administered by Court • 1 specialized JSO program at each security level (high, med, C-B); none for JSO’s w/special needs 2006 JSO Data • 314 juveniles charged w/sex offenses in 2006 • CSC I-IV, Gross Indecency, Indecent Exposure • 175 completed cases • 1 Prosecutor handles all JSO cases Initial Charge Data (n=175) CSC I 59% CSC II 23% CSC III 6% CSC IV 7% Other 5% CSC I CSC II CSC III CSC IV Other Data Snapshot: Initial Charge Case Outcome Data
- 55. 3 Note: 75% of the Initial CSC I charges reduced to Gross Indecency; Resulting Case Outcomes (for full report: see Calley, 2008) Case Outcome Data (n=175) Dismissed 8% PUA 31% Commitment 30% Unaccounted 5% Court Probation 26% Dismissed PUA Probation Commitment Unaccounted CJSOM Initiative: Major Areas of Analysis Improvement 1. Inves., Pros., Disposition 2. Assessment 3. Clinical Treatment 4. Re-Entry/ Re-Integration 5. Community Supervision 6. Sex Offender Registry
- 56. 4 What we learned about our region: System has several major strengths: • Highly invested system; climate of collaboration support • Specific prosecutor to handle all JSO cases • Law enf. trg. in working with child abuse survivors • Comprehensive data collection data maintenance systems • Continuum of available treatment options And several areas in need of improvement: • Lack of individual collective knowledge re: JSO’s associated issues • Under-developed system of JSO mgmt. • Lack of comprehensive systematic review of data • Lack of tx. options for JSO’s w/special needs System Improvement Strategies The Implementation Plan: 36 Strategies w/Emphasis on the Adoption of Best Practices, Training Education a. Exploratory Committees: Continuum of Care, Use of the Polygraph, Legal Issues re: Re-Entry, Victim Funding b. Resource Development: Prosecutorial Jurist Decision-Making Guides, JSO Support Resource Directory, Guide to Reducing Secondary Trauma, JSO Fact Sheets c. Quarterly Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Forum d. Comprehensive JSO Data Collection Plan Annual Data Review Forums
- 57. 5 Implementation Plan (cont.) e. Best Practice Policy Development: Assessment Practices, Treatment, Supervision, Community Support Network Development f. Development Delivery of Comprehensive Trg. Curriculum g. Development Implementation of Comprehensive Website for ongoing support sustainability Implementation Plan Outcomes to Date a. Ad Hoc Committee Work: Continuum of Care Recommendations resulted in new program development for re- entry (implemented 1/09), older youth/young adults and JSO’s w/serious mental health issues (to be implemented in 2009) Legal Ethical Use of the Polygraph Policy Developed implemented Legal Issues re: Re-Entry: Development dissemination of new information re: school re-entry, release of records, Registry Victim Funding: Identification dissemination of various resources b. Resource Development: Prosecutorial Jurist Decision-Making Guides, JSO Resource Directory, Guide to Reducing Secondary Trauma, JSO Fact Sheets
- 58. 6 Implementation Plan Outcomes to Date (con’t) c. Quarterly Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Forum 10/07; approx. 50 participants from across region; varied locations; increased communication, broader culture of treatment d. Comprehensive JSO Data Collection Plan Annual Data Review Forums: County, prosecutorial provider data collection; initial data review forum to occur in Summer, 2009 e. Best Practice Policies Developed Implemented: Assessment Practices, JSO C-B Residential Treatment, JSO Supervision, JSO Re-Entry Role of Community Support Network f. Training Curriculum Curriculum: Introductory Sessions: Legal Issues, Etiology, Modus Operandi, Unique Characteristics, Empirically-Based Treatment Best Practices: Assessment, C-B Residential Treatment, Re-Entry Supervision Special Needs: JSO System Improvement, Secondary Trauma, Investigation Data Collection Details: Embedded policies assessment tools Delivered throughout region 1st half of 2008; +3,000 participants On-line training conversion August, 08 Current local national participation
- 59. 7 g. Website Details: • Comprehensive resource for current new stakeholders • Central location for all initiative-related information; accessible to all • Launched 7/08 • Quarterly Updates • Promotes ongoing knowledge about JSO’s Website Areas: • About CJSOM • Training Curriculum • Research • Members Only http://www.cjsom.com/ Full Implementation Plan – available at website Lessons Learned • Necessity of pre-planning buy in • Broad-based yet limited participation in collaborative effort • Cannot under-estimate the amount of work needed for all phases: Assessment, analysis, implementation • Recognition of soft (e.g., collaboration teamwork, collective ability to progress, broad-based decision-making) hard outcomes • Need for continuous recognition of initiative’s relevance • Viewing first two years as beginning of process rather than completion
- 67. Greg Brown BA MCJ Chief Probation Officer Twentieth Judicial District Boulder, Colorado Greg has been working in the corrections field for over 20 years. He has worked with both adult and juvenile populations and in a variety of specialized programs. He has extensive experience in the supervision, treatment and management of adult and juvenile sex offenders, as well as domestic violence offenders. In addition, Greg has spent considerable time developing standards, policies and best practices for the community based management of sex offenders. Greg is now the Chief Probation Officer for the 20th Judicial District in Boulder Colorado. Greg has his bachelor’s degree in sociology and a master’s degree in criminal justice administration from the University of Colorado. In addition, he is an instructor and consultant in sex offender management and computer monitoring for the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA), Internet Crimes Against Children Taskforces (ICAC), and the National Law Enforcement Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC). He also serves on the National Institute of Justices (NIJ)-Technology Working Group. Finally, he is a certified computer forensic examiner and he provides training in computer field investigations to law enforcement and probation and parole.
- 69. The Performance Institute High Risk Sex Offenders ‐ Handling Volatile and High Risk Sex Offenders Orlando FL February 26, 2009 A Bit About Greg 1. B.A. in Sociology Political Science, M.A. in Public Administration/Criminal Justice. 2. Certified Computer Examiner (CCE)‐ ISCFE 3. Over 20 Years as a Probation Officer in Colorado, both adult and juvenile probationers. 4. Chief Probation Officer of the 20th Judicial District, CO. 5. Supervised the Sex Offender Team for 20th Judicial District, CO. 6. Pioneered polygraph and specialized treatment of sex offenders in Colorado. 7. Lead instructor on probation issues for ICAC Task Force. 8. Has examined hundreds of sex offender’s computers. 9. Founded charter high school that serves “at‐risk” youth. greg.brown@judicial.state.co.us
- 70. What Do We Do? • Monitor Court Order/Release Conditions • Write Pre‐Sentence, Violation, Review reports • Meet offenders in field, office, and treatment • Assist offenders with employment, housing, treatment, and other barriers to success • Goal = public safety, no more victimization What Do We Do? • Appropriately advocate for offenders in the community • Balance Community Safety and Offender Rehabilitation (short and long‐term) • Support and Hold Offenders Accountable • Two types of success – Offenders that make themselves monitorable – Offenders that fail to make themselves monitorable
- 73. In U.S. : • 1.3 forcible rapes of adult women per minute • 78 per hour • 1,871 per day • 59,916 per month • 683,000 per year Rape in America Study, Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center and National Victim Center, 1992
- 76. Survey of 193 Male College Students: • 21% ‐ Admitted sexual attraction to small children • 9% ‐ Admitted sexual fantasies involving children • 5% ‐ Admitted masturbating to such fantasies • 7%‐ Indicated they would be likely to engage in behavior if they knew they could avoid detection punishment (Briere Runtz, 1989) Polygraph Study with British Offenders: • 50% of child molesters admitted to both incest and extra‐familial abuse • 66% of rapists also admitted to sex offenses against children • 43% of sample admitted to sadistic sexual interests (Wilcox Sosnowski, 2005 Journal of Sexual Aggression, 11, 3‐25)
- 77. Catch a Predator Video • How many of you saw this series? • Only one man was a convicted sex offender • The Internet is a powerful seduction for deviant thought • Think about how it might increase a known sex offender’s risk KBSolutions KNOWLEDGE BASED SOLUTIONS Source: www.perverted‐justice.com “The Rabbi”
- 78. Source: www.perverted‐justice.com “The Rabbi” Start Time: 04:04 Knows the “target” is 13 Suggests sex – 5 minutes into the chat. REDBD: The offender. MadC Rad1992: The Shill Blue text: editorial comments entered by the shill Who Goes to Prison? • Nationwide only 30% of sex offenders go to prison. • On average 70% are in the community • The vast majority of all sex offenders will be in the community someday
- 79. What Happens to Them? • LE investigates, charges and arrests. This can take a day, a week or a month…but it is generally time framed. • We (probation and parole) in many cases get them for the rest of their lives The Problem • The vast majority of Sex Offenders will be released • On a given day in 2005 there were approximately 600,000 convicted sex offenders, 60% to 70% were in the community. • The median victim age = less than 13 years old; the median age of rape victims was about 22 years.
- 80. No Cure • Because it is a behavioral disorder, there is no known cure • Lengthy sentences • Focus for probation is intrafamilial – majority of offenders under community supervision Treatment Model • No cure philosophy Sexual offending is a behavioral disorder which cannot be “cured”. Sexual offenses are defined by law and may or may not be associated with or accompanied by the characteristics of sexual deviance which are described as paraphilias. Some sex offenders also have co‐existing conditions such as mental disorders, organic disorders, or substance abuse problems.
- 82. Treating sexTreating sex offenders is a teamoffenders is a team and community effortand community effort (O’Connell, Leberg Donaldson,1990) Community Supervision Team May Include: • Supervising officer • Sex offender treatment provider • Polygraph examiner • Plethysmographer • Victim family therapists • Adjunctive treatment providers • Child protection caseworkers • Law enforcement • Community members (e.g. family, friends, employers…) (Davies Vigil, 2002)
- 83. Collaboration with Victim ServicesCollaboration with Victim Services •• Victim Representatives can share Victim Representatives can share information from victiminformation from victim •• VR can explain victim behaviorVR can explain victim behavior •• Teams can respond to victimTeams can respond to victim’’s needss needs •• Teams can learn from victim researchTeams can learn from victim research •• Teams VR can attend each otherTeams VR can attend each other’’s trainings training Creating Maintaining a Functional Team • Recognize role differences • Recognize the value in different perspectives • Be respectful • Commit to communicate • Work toward conflict resolution • Be willing to admit mistakes • Be willing to learn from others • Commit to attend regular meetings (Vigil Davies, 2001)
- 84. Guiding Principles • Sex Offenders Are Dangerous • Community Safety is Paramount • Assessment and Evaluation of Sex Offenders is an On-going Process. Progress in treatment and Level of Risk Are Not Constant Over Time • Sexual Offending is a Behavioral Disorder Which Cannot Be “Cured” (for adults) GUIDING PRINCIPLES CONT. • Assignment to Community Supervision is a Privilege, And Sex Offenders Must Be Completely Accountable For Their Behaviors • Sex Offenders Must Waive Confidentiality For Evaluation, Treatment, Supervision And Case Management Purposes
- 85. Guiding Principles, Cont. • Victims Have a Right To Safety And Self- Determination • When A Child Is Sexually Abused Within The Family, The Child’s Individual Need For Safety, Protection, Developmental Growth And Psychological Well-being Outweighs Any Parental Or Family Interests Guiding Principles, Cont. • A Continuum Of Sex Offender Management And Treatment Options Should Be Available In Each Community In The State. • Standards and Guidelines For Assessment , Evaluation, Treatment and Behavioral Monitoring of Sex Offenders Will Be Most Effective if the Entirety of The Criminal Justice and Social Services Systems , Not Just Sex Offender Treatment Providers, Apply The Same Principles and Work Together
- 86. Guiding Principles, Cont. • The Management of Sex Offenders Requires a Coordinated Team Response • Sex Offender Assessment, Evaluation, Treatment and Behavioral Monitoring Should Be Non-discriminatory and Humane, and Bound by the Rules of Ethics and Law Guiding Principles, Cont. • Successful Treatment and Management of Sex Offenders is Enhanced by the Positive Cooperation of Family, Friends, Employers and Members of the Community who Have Influence in Sex Offender’s Lives
- 87. Model Terms and Conditions • Registration • DNA collection • Attend, actively participate in treatment, follow rules and successfully complete. • Submit to psychological and physiological assessments • You shall have no contact with children, including your own • Shall not frequent parks, playgrounds, pools, arcades or other establishments catering to children Model Terms and Conditions • No contact with victims including letters, electronic communication, third parties. • No position of trust – babysitting, volunteer work etc must be approved by the team • Not possess or view any pornography or sexually stimulating materials • Not change treatment without permission • Sign releases of information to allow PO to communicate with other professionals. • Not be allowed to subscribe to or use any internet service providers
- 88. Model Terms and Conditions • Not utilize any social networking sights or forums • Shall not possess any distance vision enhancing devices, cell phone cameras, • Disclose and follow the direction of the MDT with respect to dating and sexual activities • Disclose information about your offense as directed • Allow visit and searches of you home and other property • Subject to EHM, GPS or other forms of electronic monitoring. Containment Approach has 5 Components VICTIM ORIENTATION1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION2 3 INFORMED POLICY4 QUALITY CONTROL5 CONTAINMENT STRATEGY CJS Treatment Polygraph From: English, Pullen and Jones, 1996
- 89. “What’s best for the victim?” Children need protection Adults need empowerment The Containment Approach:The Containment Approach: 1) Victim Philosophy1) Victim Philosophy From pretrial to postFrom pretrial to post--convictionconviction through supervisionthrough supervision Interagency teams Law enforcement S.O. treatment provider Prosecuting attorney Probation and parole Other Treatment providers Polygraph services Employers/school personnel Client’s family/friends Social services caseworkers Victim representatives Faith community members The Containment Approach:The Containment Approach: 2) Collaboration2) Collaboration (Adapted from Managing Adult Sex Offenders: A Containment Approach (English, Pullen and Jones, 1996) Housing Authorities Local government
- 90. The Containment ApproachThe Containment Approach 3) Containment Strategies3) Containment Strategies CJSTX POLYGRAPH Confidentiality waivers Surveillance officers Interagency teams Employment restrictions Internet restrictions Approved Tx providers Polygraph examiner approval Leisure time monitoring Family reunification policies LE registration Long term supervision/ tx. Specialized supervision conditions Residential requirements/ restrictions Victim therapist/advocate Consistent policies/ training Small, specialized caseloads The acceptance or rejection of plea agreements in cases of sexual assault The use of polygraph information The acceptance of sex offenders in denial for community supervision Decisions about the granting of limited immunity to offenders who reveal additional sexual crimes in the process of treatment A Containment ApproachA Containment Approach 4) Informed Policies4) Informed Policies
- 91. Selection criteria for treatment providers Risk focused surveillance of sex offenders Family reunification assessment protocols Confidentiality waivers Revocation procedures Third party liability / duty to warn potential victims Failure to progress in treatment A Containment ApproachA Containment Approach 4) Informed Policies4) Informed Policies A Containment Approach:A Containment Approach: 5) Quality Control5) Quality Control •Frequent training •Understanding of job impact •Adequate supervision •Standards for practice •Risk assessment •Regular meetings •Individual treatment plans •Measures of progress Or how will you know if you are getting anywhere?
- 92. Remember: relationship w/ P.O. has also been shown to be an important factor in offender success rates! • Effective supervision breakdown: – Features of individual client = 40% • Internal (IQ, Dual Diagnoses, etc) • External (social support) – Relationship with P.O. = 30% • Accurate empathy • Working alliance – Placebo (anticipatory set) = 15% – Intervention model = 15% (Lambert, 2006 Beutier etal.,2006) Supervision Standards Guidelines • Supervising officer is team leader (See section 5.000) – Convenes team as soon as possible after sentencing/release – Team consists at minimum of: supervising officer, treatment provider, polygraph examiner – Completely open flow of information between these team members
- 93. Does Treatment Work? Does Sex Offender Treatment Work? (Or, is any treatment better than none?) Washington State Institute for Public Policy (2000) Recidivism RateRecidivism Rate Type of TreatmentType of Treatment WithoutWithout WithWith CognitiveCognitive--BehavioralBehavioral 6.4%6.4% 3.5%3.5% PsychotherapyPsychotherapy 6.4%6.4% 11.2%11.2% BehavioralBehavioral 6.4%6.4% 5.5%5.5%
- 94. Does Sex Offender Treatment Work? Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006 Type of treatment Reduction in Recidivism rate Psychotherapy 0.0% Cognitive-Behavioral treatment in prison -14.9% Cognitive-Behavioral treatment in the community -31.2% Behavioral therapy 0.0% Recidivism Rates, (Looman, 2000 ‐ via Marshall, ATSA, 2007) Sample = High risk sex offenders 10+ years follow‐up, N = 178 Treated Sexual Recidivism 23.6% Untreated 51.7%
- 95. Recidivism Rates (Hanson, et al, 2002 via Marshall, ATSA, 2007) K ( Studies in meta- analysis) = 16 N = 3461 Follow-up = 4 years Sexual Recidivism General Recidivism Treated 9.9% 32.3% Untreated 17.3% 51.3% CO. SO‐ISP Program Statistics FY 2004: New cases = 205 Total cases = 905 Total Revocations = 20 (2.2% of active cases) Technical Violations = 15 (75% of all revos) New Felony = 4 (20% of all revos) New Misdemeanor = 1 (5% of all revos) (SCAO, 2005)
- 96. CO SO‐ISP Program Statistics FY 2006: New cases = 350 Total cases = 1203 Total revocations = 108 (8.97% of active cases) Technical violations = 91 (84% of total revos) New felonies = 11 (10% of total revos) New misdemeanors = 6 (6% of total revos) (SCAO, 2006) Oregon Prison Treatment +Oregon Prison Treatment + Community SupervisionCommunity Supervision Twin Rivers Correctional Center in Washington ••After 2000 days,After 2000 days, 40%40% of sex offendersof sex offenders receiving only prison treatment failedreceiving only prison treatment failed ••After 2000 days,After 2000 days, 15%15% of sex offendersof sex offenders receiving prison treatment and communityreceiving prison treatment and community treatment, polygraph examinations, andtreatment, polygraph examinations, and supervision failedsupervision failed Gordon Packard, 1999
- 97. Illinois Probation StudyIllinois Probation Study Studied probation sex offender programs inStudied probation sex offender programs in several counties in Illinois and concludedseveral counties in Illinois and concluded ““allall specialized probation programs should be basedspecialized probation programs should be based on theon the containment approachcontainment approach and should includeand should include (a) at least(a) at least threethree unannounced random field visitsunannounced random field visits per offender every month,per offender every month, (b) a full(b) a full--disclosuredisclosure polygraphpolygraph and a maintenanceand a maintenance polygraph exams every six months, andpolygraph exams every six months, and (c) a(c) a tight partnershiptight partnership between probation officersbetween probation officers and treatment providers that includes probationand treatment providers that includes probation officers appearing at random times at theofficers appearing at random times at the treatment site to check on offenderstreatment site to check on offenders’’ attendance.attendance.”” Stalans (2004:599) What Should You Expect from Probation/Parole and Treatment Providers? • Here is what you should expect from agencies monitoring and treatment sex offenders – Keep them honest and demand quality containment and treatment!
- 98. Structured Sex Offender Treatment Review (SSOTR) – available at www.kbsolutions.com • Developed in response to a research project for the Colorado 20th Judicial District. • It is a structured review designed to keep professionals on track when dealing with sex offenders. • It is NOT an assessment of the offender, rather it is a process to focus the treatment team on important issues in supervision and treatment. • It is designed to keep treatment team aligned and focused. • Consists of 31 questions (adult form) or 33 questions (juvenile form) that require binary responses. Three Basic Elements 1. Offender assumes responsibility for past behavior. 2. Offender takes steps toward increased safety. 3. Offender makes necessary collateral lifestyle changes.
- 99. 1. Admits Offense Yes: The offender is not exhibiting ANY form of denial and admits all aspects of the offense. No: Offender is practicing any of the following forms of denial (Brake, 1999) 1. Weak Avoidance (minor justification, denies future offenses, denies other historical offenses). 2. Projections/Moderate Avoidance (justifies actions, minimizes harm, denies arousal). 3. Projections/Strong Avoidance (admits lesser included behavior, claims to not remember the offense). 4. Primitive Denial/Severe Avoidance (admits past but not current behavior, denies offense but can describe harm, denies offense and harm, hostile or delusional denial). Accepts Responsibility 2. Greater Detail Of Offense Yes: Offender is providing more detail than are in the victim(s) or official reports of the current offense(s). No: Offender provides a level of detail for the current offense that is equal to or less than the level of detail provided by the victim statements or official records of the case. Accepts Responsibility
- 104. 11. Initiates Regular Tool Use Steps Towards Safety Yes: The offender demonstrates regular tool use. This demonstration must take the form of EXTERNAL verification of the tool use by members of the offender’s containment group. Self‐report by the offender does not warrant a ‘yes’ to this element. No: The offender does not demonstrate regular tool use through externally verified means. NOTE: This is the ‘Willingness’ element. It also is an indication as to the offender’s willingness to give up control (others must be informed and report). 12. Protects Possible Victims Steps Towards Safety Yes: The offender demonstrates (s)he places the safety of potential victims above his/her personal well‐being. The demonstration must be externally verified. This could include notifying potential victims. No: The offender does not demonstrate (s)he places the safety of others over personal well‐being.
- 114. 31. Relinquishes Victim Stance Collateral Lifestyle Changes Yes: The offender is focused on the needs of the victim and the community. The offender places these needs over his/her personal needs. No: The victim is focused on his/her ‘loss’ and affects of the offense on him/her. In Summary 1. Professionals are susceptible to grooming, its part of being human. 2. Work in teams. 3. Assume you can be, and are being, groomed. 4. Use a structured approach to measuring an offender’s attempts to be safe.
- 117. Biographical Sketch Bill Bonsall has been a Probation Officer for the Santa Clara County Probation Department for 18 years. His current assignment is supervising adult sex offenders in an intensive supervision capacity. Bill was formerly contracted by the City of Sunnyvale to work with their police department in an effort to combat juvenile crime. It was during this assignment that he created a partnership between Yahoo and their police department to provide internet safety presentations to all local 6th grade students. Bill developed an internet predator class and instructs probation departments throughout California.
- 119. 1 Supervision of SexSupervision of Sex OffendersOffenders The Containment ModelThe Containment Model Widely used form of SO managementWidely used form of SO management MultiMulti--agency collaborationagency collaboration Law enforcement, Treatment provider,Law enforcement, Treatment provider, Polygraph examiner, Victim advocacyPolygraph examiner, Victim advocacy Specialized Units: DA, PD, Probation/Parole,Specialized Units: DA, PD, Probation/Parole, Judges, Police,Judges, Police, Specialized TrainingSpecialized Training
- 120. 2 PrePre-- Sentence InvestigationSentence Investigation Where effective supervision beginsWhere effective supervision begins Responsible for creating conditionsResponsible for creating conditions Report combines all factorsReport combines all factors Tools of SupervisionTools of Supervision Special conditions of Probation/ParoleSpecial conditions of Probation/Parole Sex Offender Specific TreatmentSex Offender Specific Treatment Polygraph ExaminationsPolygraph Examinations PlethysmographyPlethysmography Community NotificationCommunity Notification GPSGPS
- 121. 3 Conditions of ProbationConditions of Probation StandardStandard Register as Sex OffenderRegister as Sex Offender Submit to Search/SeizureSubmit to Search/Seizure Attend Psychological Counseling ProgramAttend Psychological Counseling Program No contact with MinorsNo contact with Minors Specialized ConditionsSpecialized Conditions Submit all email accounts and passwordsSubmit all email accounts and passwords No possession of pornographyNo possession of pornography No computer, unless approved by PONo computer, unless approved by PO Do not date/marry person with childrenDo not date/marry person with children Do not erase internet historyDo not erase internet history Must notify employer/roommate of statusMust notify employer/roommate of status Abstain fromAbstain from chatroomschatrooms, social networking sites, social networking sites
- 122. 4 Supervision StyleSupervision Style Get to know the defendantGet to know the defendant Encourage successful performance on probationEncourage successful performance on probation DonDon’’t be a bully or demeaningt be a bully or demeaning Explain only THEY can violate probationExplain only THEY can violate probation Consider your goalConsider your goal Try and get to the root cause of offenseTry and get to the root cause of offense Have empathyHave empathy Federal Sentencing GuidelinesFederal Sentencing Guidelines Chapter 5: 5B1.3 Conditions of ProbationChapter 5: 5B1.3 Conditions of Probation Section 7 (A) Requires defendant to participateSection 7 (A) Requires defendant to participate in approved sex offender treatment programin approved sex offender treatment program Section 7 (B) A condition limiting the use of aSection 7 (B) A condition limiting the use of a computer or an interactive computer service incomputer or an interactive computer service in cases in which the defendant used such itemscases in which the defendant used such items Section 7 (C) Required defendant to submit toSection 7 (C) Required defendant to submit to search of person, property, computer, or othersearch of person, property, computer, or other electronic communication/data storage deviceselectronic communication/data storage devices
- 123. 5 Sex Offender Registration andSex Offender Registration and Notification ActNotification Act Section 114 (a) (7) Requires sex offenders toSection 114 (a) (7) Requires sex offenders to provide Internet identifiers of any type that theyprovide Internet identifiers of any type that they use or will useuse or will use Internet Identifiers: Electronic mail addressesInternet Identifiers: Electronic mail addresses and other designations used for selfand other designations used for self-- identification or routing in Internetidentification or routing in Internet communication or postingcommunication or posting Residency RestrictionsResidency Restrictions ProsPros ConsCons
- 124. 6 Risk AssessmentRisk Assessment Static 99Static 99
- 125. John F. Plansky Parole and Release Director Naval Consolidated Brig Miramar
- 129. William J. Sorukas, Jr. Chief Inspector, Domestic Investigations Branch Investigative Operatins Division William J. Sorukas, Jr. is the Chief Inspector for the Domestic Investigations Branch within the Investigative Operations Division, for the United States Marshals Service. Chief Inspector Sorukas was appointed as a Deputy United States Marshal in 1986. A native of South Bend, Indiana, he earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminology from Indiana State University in 1982. On March 23, 1984, he graduated from the Indiana Law Enforcement Academy in Plainfield, IN. On August 26, 1986, he graduated from the USMS Basic Training Academy at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, GA. In 1989, Mr. Sorukas graduated from the USMS Special Operations Group Basic Training at Camp Beauregard, Pineville, LA. In 1997, he completed the Leadership Development Program at the Center for Creative Leadership in San Diego, CA. In 2001, Chief Inspector Sorukas graduated from the Department of Defenses’ Technical Surveillance Counter Measures Course at Fort Washington, MD. And, in July 2008 he attended the 40th Session of the Senior Management Institute for Police with the Police Executive Research Forum in Boston, MA. From 1986 - 1999, he served in the Southern District of California, where he rose to a Supervisory Deputy U.S. Marshal. His assignments in San Diego included supervision of the district warrant squad from 1995 - 1999, and the Coordinator for the Fugitive Group of the San Diego Violent Crime Task Force. From 1989 - 1995, he was a member of the USMS Special Operations Group. In 1999, he transferred to USMS Headquarters where he served two years as a Senior Inspector within the Domestic Investigations Unit, before moving to the Technical Operations Group, where he became the Chief Inspector in Chicago. Prior to becoming a deputy marshal, Mr. Sorukas was a police officer for the State of Indiana for nearly three years, following a brief assignment as an undercover narcotics officer for the La Porte County, Indiana Sheriffs Department. In October 2008, Chief Inspector Sorukas was honored with an Attorney General Distinguished Service Award. In 2002, he was presented with a Top Cop Award by the National Association of Police Organizations for his investigative effort and contributions in the Washington D.C. sniper case and the arrests of John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo. In 2000, Chief Inspector Sorukas was recognized with a national award by the Executive Office for the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) for his role in “Operation Purple Gang”. In 1991, he received the Chairman’s Award for Heroism from the San Diego Federal Executive Association. Throughout his career with the Marshals Service, he has received commendations related to fugitive investigations from Attorneys General Edwin Meese, Richard Thornburgh, Janet Reno, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzalez, and Michael Mukasey. He is a member of the International Association of Financial Crimes Investigators, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, Police Executive Research Forum, National Association of Fugitive Investigators, National Sheriffs Association, National Association of Police Organizations, National Technical Investigators Association, International Association of Chiefs of Police, and the U.S. Marshals Service Association.
- 133. Jerry Eitniear Jerry Eitniear, MPA, has been with the Arizona Department of Corrections for nearly 16 years in a variety of positions within Community Corrections, ranging from Community Correctional Officer to Supervisor/Manager of the Sex Offender Coordination Unit, Interstate Compact Unit/DCA, and Warrant Services/Hearings Unit, and is currently the Bureau Administrator for Community Corrections. Jerry obtained his Bachelor’s Degree in Management and Master of Public Administration degree from Arizona State University.
- 135. Nicole Studer Nicole Studer, BA, has been with the Arizona Department of Corrections for over 19 years. She has held a variety of programs, security and management positions within the prison system and Community Corrections. Currently, Nicole is the Community Correctional Manager of the Sex Offender Coordination Unit, Interstate Compact Unit, Release Unit and Warrant Services/Hearings Unit. Nicole obtained her Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology from Arizona State University.