Program Objective This program proposes to provide prevention and intervention services through a community response model. The program objective is to increase accountability for first-time, youthfbl offenders by utilizing Neighborhood Accountability Boards to impose community service and restitution, thereby decreasing the likelihood of re-arrest or fiuther escalation into the juvenile justice system. The program will strengthen community-based partnerships as Neighborhood Accountability Boards provide opportunities for community volunteers to take an active role in confronting and resolving the problem of juvenile crime within their own neighborhoods. Community service imposed by the Neighborhood Accountability Boards will provide the community at large with a benefit rather than a loss from juvenile crime as well.

Description of Unmet Needs Stanislaus County's Challenge Grant I demonstration project called the Intensive Diversion Early Action Program (IDEA) was awarded in 1997. This program was developed in response to the County's Juvenile Justice Master Plan and Local Action Plan developed in 1996 which identified the unmet need to provide swift, sure, graduated consequences for inappropriate behavior and to encompass prevention, early intervention and intermediate sanctions. The Challenge Grant IDEA Project ' s Year Three Evaluation Report concludes mixed findings; however, two aspects of the program were noted to be positive, specifically, "Neighborhood Accountability Board members benefited by helping young people and by learning about available social services and agencies.. .Youth benefited from becoming involved in community volunteer work through their participation in the program and community agencies began to view young people as part of an opportunity to build their programs." The IDEA Project, now in it's fourth and final year of fUnding, has established Neighborhood Accountability Boards and community service in only three targeted areas within Stanislaus County (west Modesto, south ModestoICeres, and southwest Modesto). Resources are needed to continue fbnding for the existing three Neighborhood Accountability Boards as well as to expand the program to other areas of the county. Stanislaus County received 2,8 10 citations fi-om law enforcement this past fiscal year 1999-2000. Of those citations, 80 1 were referred to local diversion agencies and an additional 275 citations were processed through the Challenge Grant project, resulting in a total of 1,076 cases throughout the County being diverted. We feel that Neighborhood Accountability Boards are the appropriate venue to handle a large number of these referrals.

Program Effectiveness The following information was gathered fiom evaluation reports from Stanislaus and Santa Clara Counties and from the Merced County Probation Department.

Santa Clara County' s Challenge Grant project, called Restorative Justice, utilizes Neighborhood Accountability Boards (NABS) to incorporate the principles and values of restorative justice in addressing crimes committed by youth. Santa Clara County's semi-annual progress report

reflects that the Neighborhood Accountability Boards have been expanded to other areas within their county. The Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors fbnded additional areas to be served by Neighborhood Accountability Boards. Approximately 130 community members serve in the grant fbnded areas' while an additional 100 members serve in the County fbnded areas. In reference to youth participating in the NAB process, Santa Clara County's Second Year Evaluation Report states, "During the follow-up period, 88% of participating youth did not receive a new referral to Juvenile Probation." Pre and post self-assessments were administered to youth participating in the NAB process to measure growth in risk avoidance, protective and resilience assets. "The results of this analysis indicate that overall score on all 12 assets showed a 5.6% growth." Santa Clara County7 s Comprehensive Multi-agency Juvenile Justice Action Plan states, "Evaluators looked at long term outcome data fiom two views. One view averaged data from 1994 until the start of the RJP Pestorative Justice Program) in each area and then compared the change from RJP Fiscal Year 1999-2000 data. The data from three to four years before the start of the RJP compared to the change from RJP Fiscal Year 1999-2000 shows that the Santa Clara County is meeting some of the long-term outcomes and targets set at the beginning of the RJ intervention. The original goals were to reduce a number of juvenile crime indicators by 20%. Santa Clara County is making progress in meeting the original goal of a 20% reduction set in the 1997 Juvenile Justice Action Plan." The following data reflects the percent reduction in Juvenile Crime Indicators for Santa Clara County Fiscal Year 1994 - 1995 compared to Fiscal Year 1999-2000: CYA Referrals - 67% reduction for RJP areas as compared to 62% reduction for non-RJP areas; Ranch Failure & Escapes - 30% reduction for WP areas as compared to 16% reduction for non-RJP areas; Juvenile Hall Custodies-27% reduction for RJP areas as compared to 24% reduction for non-RJP areas; Citations-27% reduction for RJP areas as compared to 2% reduction for non-RJP areas; and Referrals 17% reduction for RJP areas as compared to 24% reduction for non-RJP areas. This view reflects, with the exception of "referrals", that the RJP areas showed a greater percent reduction. "The second view was to measure Fiscal Year 1999-2000 to a trend line that was developed using data fiom three years before the start of the RJP. This view shows RJP areas with the exception of citations as showing a greater percent reduction." The following data reflects the percent reduction: CYA Referrals-67% for RJP areas as compared to 62% for non-RJP areas; Ranch Failure and Escapes-16% for RJP areas as compared to 19% for non-RJP areas; Juvenile Hall Custodies- 13% for WP areas as compared to4% for non-RJP areas; Citations-21% for RJP areas as compared to 34% for non-Rm areas; and Referrals-26% reduction for RJP areas as compared to 14% for non-RJP areas. Based on the above-mentioned information, the ItTP areas appear to be doing better than the non-RJP areas.

Stanislaus County's IDEA Program Three Year Evaluation Report sites, "One very positive trend is that, on average, school performance has steadily increased among Challenge Grant program participants. The proportion of IDEA youth performing at or above grade level rose from about two-thirds at intake to more than 80%; moreover, improvements were sustained through the six-month follow-up period. Trends toward improvement have also been observed in school suspensions and expulsions, and in child abuse and domestic violence."

In 1996, the Merced County Probation Department developed the Youth Accountability Board, modeled after Neighborhood Accountability Boards in San Bernardino County. Merced County has over 100 Youth Accountability Board volunteers and has ten site locations within Merced County. The Youth Accountability Boards have provided services to over 700 clients since it's implementation. Merced County's success rate for all Youth Accountability Board panels in the fiscal year 1999-2000 was 71% completion. Youth Accountability Board members have gone into their communities and established partnerships with other agencies to provide programs and

IV- 17

counseling services for their clients. If not for the existence of the Youth Accountability Board, first time offenders would only receive a letter closing their case. The success of Merced's Youth Accountability Board was fhther recognized after the department received an award from the California Youth Authority for their program.

Program Description This project will extract and expand upon the existing Neighborhood Accountability Boards established through the Challenge Grant I. Neighborhood-based citizen panels will be recruited and trained to assist in confronting and resolving the problem of juvenile crime within their own neighborhood. First-time, youthfbl offenders will be referred by Probation and/or police agencies to NABS and will appear before the Neighborhood Accountability Board (NAB) to answer for their involvement in the referred offense. Every effort will be made to have a parent or guardian attend with their child. M e r reviewing the arrest report and hearing fiom the minor and parent, the NAB will design an intervention to hold the youth accountable for the offense and to repair harm to the community through such options as victidoffender mediation, apology letters, written reports on the effects of crime, completion of restitution or community work in lieu of payment. Community service will be geared towards helping restore the community and build competencies, as well as self-esteem, for the youth. The NAB will monitor completion of the NAB contract and will report results back to the probation department. The program will service a minimum of 200 youth through six operational NABS located in the following communities: Turlock, PattersodNewman, Oakdale/Riverbank, west Modesto, south Modesto/Ceres, and central1nortWeast Modesto.

Outcome Objectives/Measures As previously mentioned, the objective of this program is to increase accountability and to reduce the likelihood of re-arrest. The measures of this goal are: 1) reduced rates of arrests for new law violations; 2) reduced rates of incarceration for new law violations; 3) increased rates of successfbl completion of restitution; and 4) increased rates of successfLl completion of community service responsibilities as ordered by the Neighborhood Accountability Board. Completion of probation, violation of probation and court-ordered community service would not apply to this program; however, data will be collected for these items.

Program impact will be measured as to items (I) through (4) based upon historical data collected by the Challenge Grant I Program for approximately 100 control group youth who received a traditional 6-8 weeks of diversion services fiom July 1, 1999 to June 30,2000. For items (1) and (2), it is expected that the NAB youth will have fewer rates of arrest and incarceration for new law violations than the diversion youth. For items (3) and (4), it is expected that NAB youth will have higher rates of successfbl completion of restitution and community service than the diversion youth. No change is expected for violations of probation or court-ordered community service, as these items do not apply to either the NAB youth or the diversion youth; however, these data for these variables will be collected and reported. Program costs and numbers served will be tracked in order to establish the annual per capita cost of the program. This program relates to Local Juvenile Justice Strategy Objective One, Comrnunity/School Based Programs, outcome measure 1.3 and Objective Four, Improve or Create Data Collection Systems, outcome measures 4.1 and 4.2.

Collaboration and Integration of Services, Information Sharing This program will be a collaborative effort between the Probation Department, community based organizations and the community at large. Probation will share appropriate case information with the community-based agency contracted with to run the program. Currently, there is no comprehensive, integrated database shared among agencies. Probation and our partners will continue to share data using our existing applications and resources while the County continues its efforts in integrations of these systems. Program Costs In order to ensure proper collection of data to support the required outcome measures for program evaluation, to provide a liaison with contracted service providers, have budgetary oversight of knding mechanisms and to administer proper placement of minors throughout the juvenile system into CPA 2000 programs, salaries and benefits have been prorated across CPA 2000 programs for a Probation Manager and an Account Technician. Evaluation and data collection have been prorated in a like manner and are also included in each budget.

Personnel to be added: .06 (FTE) Probation Manager .06 (FTE) Account Technician

Costs by Budget Category

Salaries and Benefits $8529

Services and Supplies 0

Professional Services $12,000 Evaluation: $6,000 Data Collection: $6,000

CBO Contracts $75.000

Total $95,529

Implementation Schedules/Timeframes

Implementation activities include the following:

1. Develop service contracts-April through May 200 1 2. Develop program evaluation-April through May 200 1 3, Recruit and train community volunteers-April through June 200 1 4. Develop program procedures-May through June 200 1

It is anticipated that implementation activities will be completed by July 1,2001.

IV- 19

Program Objective The Home Supervision Program is designed to provide protection to the community and ensure that minors appear for court hearings. By restricting appropriately selected minors to their homes rather than detaining them in Juvenile Hall, secure detention beds can be reserved for those youth posing the greatest danger to the community and taxpayer costs for juvenile facility placement can be avoided. Program participants remain in their homes, instead of Juvenile Hall, pending adjudication andlor disposition hearings in Juvenile Court. The minors are supervised through frequent face-to-face visits by program staff who verify school attendance and participation in structured, community based counseling programs, and compliance with imposed restrictions. The objective of this proposal is to expand the program to enhance the supervision of the minors during the critical hours from 3pm to 9pm, and to expand supervision from four (4) to seven (7) days a week with a focus on the County's geographic areas of high juvenile criminal activity. We also plan to increase the number of youth supervised on Home Supervision.

Description of Unmet Needs The County's 1996 Juvenile Justice Master Plan addressed the overcrowding of Juvenile Hall by recommending the addition of more detention beds and the creation of an Electronic Monitoring program which would reduce the dependence on Juvenile Hall for detention and sanction purposes. Through two construction grants, the County has filled the identified need for additional Juvenile Hall beds. A 30-bed Maximum Security Unit was opened in June 2000 and construction will begin on a 40-bed Special Needs Unit for mental health and substance abuse detainees in Spring 200 1. With the addition of these beds, we will have exceeded the plan's goal of 152 beds by 2006. The Electronic Monitoring program was added in 1997, and is routinely used to capacity.

Prior to February 2000, the Home Supervision program in Stanislaus County did not include direct contact with minors in the community. It was managed as a caseload with a ratio of one (1) staff to 200 minors. Outcomes were not tracked. In February 2000, the program was modified to improve offender accountability through direct community contacts and immediate sanctions for violations. This was accomplished by reducing the staffing ration from 1:200 to 1:30. However, the program should be expanded to allow more fiequent contacts during critical hours and weekends with a focus on the communities of Turlock, west Modesto and southeast Modesto. Current crime statistics from the Stanislaus County Sheriff s Department, the Stanislaus County Probation Department and the Modesto Police Department have identified these areas as the "hot spots" of the County for concentrations of juvenile crime.

Home Supervision/Electronic Monitoring programs are operating with a staff ratio of 1 :30 minors. In the current program, minors are seen in the community on the average of three (3 ) days per week between the hours of 7:30am and 6:30pm. In addition, community supervision is available until 8:00 PM one night per week in one area of the city of Modesto only. It is our goal to reduce the ratio to 1 : 15 and expand the program to seven days per week, concentrating in the identified "hot spots'' during the critical hours from 3pm until 9pm daily. The smaller ratio will

allow for contacts at least five times per week throughout the County and daily contacts on the weekends in the "hot spot" areas.

Population to be Sewed Home Supervision is available to the Juvenile Court and the Probation Department Intake Unit as an alternative to secure detention for minors pending adjudication for new referrals as well as for probation violations. It is also available to the Court for dispositional sanctions in lieu of a commitment to Juvenile Hall. It should be noted that Stanislaus County does not have a camp or commitment facility.

The Home Supervision program served 884 juvenile offenders in calendar year 2000. The current staffing is designed to serve 450 minors per year. The program serves all minors that are referred. Thus, when referrals exceed capacity, program components are modified, resulting in a reactive rather than proactive program. With additional staff and expanded hours of operation, it is anticipated that the program can serve all areas of the County seven days a week, concentrate services to the areas of high juvenile crime, and provide all program components to 950 minors annually.

Program Description The legal authority for Home Supervision, found in the Welfare and Institutions Code Section 840, mandates each county to establish a Home Supervision program as an alternative to detention in Juvenile Hall.

Home Supervision relates to the Local Juvenile Justice Strategy Objective 3; Outcome Measure 3.1, increased intensive supervision. The program is utilized for minors who are permitted to remain in their own homes, in lieu of Juvenile Hall, pending krther court proceedings. The program includes House Arrest and Electronic Monitoring components. The purpose of both components is to increase community safety by restricting minors to their own homes and to enforce the restrictions through community supervision by probation staff and the use of electronic monitoring equipment. A continuum of sanctions, ranging fiom counseling to booking in Juvenile Hall, have been developed allowing for immediate interventions applied on an individual basis. The participant's history, family strengths, and seriousness of program violations are considered when sanctions are imposed. However, there is no tolerance for new law violations. If arrested for new law violations, participants are booked into Juvenile Hall.

Home Supervision is staffed by Group Supervisors assigned to the Juvenile Institutions Division. They are assigned a caseload in specific geographic areas of the County. To improve offender accountability and ensure compliance with court orders and program expectations, minors should be seen in the community at random times including weekend and evening hours. By expanding program hours and implementing a seven-day work week we will provide frequent unannounced visits with minors, contact with working parents in the homes, effective communication with school officials and program directors of community-based organizations.

Minors enrolled in the Electronic Monitoring component of the Home Supervision Program are court-ordered to wear an electronic transmitter that monitors their movement to and from their home. While participating in the Electronic Monitoring program, minors may be authorized to leave home, to attend school, church, medical appointments or other court authorized functions. Their schedule must be pre-approved by the program staff Minors who deviate from the

IV - 21

approved scheduled are arrested by program staff and returned to Juvenile Hall. Stanislaus County has a zero tolerance for non-compliance with program or new law violations. Additionally, Electronic Monitoring is available as a step-down from custody for juvenile court wards committed to serve time in Juvenile Hall. Regional assignments allow officers to become familiar with the programs, schools, law enforcement and other services available in their areas. Through the expanded hours, staff could work more closely with parents, setting the tone for minors to comply with their conditions of probation, thereby increasing their likelihood of successfbl completion of probation. Keeping minors in the home will reduce the cost of out of home placement ant the disruption to family functioning. Information gathered by Home Supervision Officers is made available to the juvenile court and Probation casework officers for development and monitoring of case plans. Also, through program integration, Home Supervision participants can be included in the job readiness and job search components of the Day Commitment Program, when appropriate, to assist them in developing the potential to meet restitution obligations.

Stanislaus County will utilize CPA 2000 fbnds to integrate Home Supervision with other Alternative to Custody Programs, specifically the Day Commitment Program, Work Program, and the Graffiti Abatement Program. When the programs are fully integrated, Home Supervision participants will be directed to participate in educational and vocational programs to assist them in completing court ordered mandates including attendance at future court hearings and conditions of probation and restitution.

Home Supervision is designed to:

Protect the community by restricting movement within the community; Enforce compliance through frequent, unannounced contacts in the community during traditional and non-traditional hours; Reduce recidivism through daily supervision and highly structured activities; Impose immediate consequences for program violations; Promote program efficiency and effectiveness by assigning officers to geographic regions;

Enforce school attendance through regular contact with program participants and communication with school officials;

Increase offender accountability by ensuring attendance at scheduled court hearings.

Information Sharing and Partnering Information sharing among probation staff and community partners is coordinated through several processes. The automated case management system in the Probation Department links the casework services with the institutional system. School and immunization records are electronically shared as appropriate. Home Supervision staff participate in regularly scheduled meetings between the Juvenile Institutions Division and Probation's partnering agencies such as mental health, schools, substance abuse s tac non-profit community based agencies, medical staff, and probation caseworkers. Minutes from meetings are widely distributed among program partners. Program staff work closely with local law enforcement agencies to share information on specific cases as well as intelligence for specific regions.

Demonstrated Effectiveness Home Supervision programs in Stanislaus County and in other California counties have proven effective in reducing utilization of Juvenile Hall while curbing new arrests and program technical violations. During 2000, 70%' or 61 8 minors, successfblly completed the Stanislaus County combined House Arrest and Electronic Monitoring programs. bbSuccess" is defined as no new law violations and no new technical violations that resulted in re-incarceration during the program's duration. With regard to new law violations alone, in 2000 the local program recorded a 95% success rate of minors who did not commit new law violations while in the program. The results of the Stanislaus County program are consistent with the outcomes fiom the San Diego County program. The statistical data available from San Diego County covers the period of June 1999 through July 2000.

Established benchmarks:

75.4% of minors in the Stanislaus County House Arrest component and 73% of the minors in the San Diego program completed the program successfblly. 98% of minors in the Stanislaus County House Arrest Program component and 97% in the San Diego program suffered no arrests for new law violations. 62% of the minors in the Stanislaus Electronic Monitoring component and 63% in the San Diego program completed the program successfully. 92% of the minors in the Stanislaus Electronic Monitoring component and 99% in the San Diego program suffered no arrests for new law violations while in the program. Neither county has benchmarked program outcomes for long-term recidivism, school attendance, restitution, or completion of probation including community service.

Recidivism rates have been tracked only for the duration that minors are actually involved in the program. As part of the expansion, we will be maintaining data on program participants to determine recidivism rates for up to six months post program participation, the rate of attendance at scheduled court hearings, successfbl completion of probation rates, and rates of compliance with restitution orders. We will also track data relating to school attendance. This program is not focused on restitution issues or the completion of probation conditions, so it is anticipated that those outcomes for this population will not differ from minors who remain in Juvenile Hall pending court. It is our goal to ensure that minors attend school regularly to promote their educational success and to structure their time toward positive activities. It is our belief that minors who are attending and participating in school programs are less likely to be committing criminal acts during school hours than those who are not in school. The above information will be compared to similar data for minors who are not involved in the program. Stanislaus County does not require minors to participate in community service work as a condition of probation. Therefore, this program will not track that data.

Home Supervision is cost effective. A comparison of the cost of Juvenile Hall incarceration vs. the cost of Home Supervision indicates that Stanislaus County saved approximately $1.6 Million during the calendar year of 2000.

Expanded Services Crime Prevention Act 2000 funds will be used to add two (2) FTE Group Supervisor II, one (1) FTE Group Supervisor I11 in order to serve more minors in the Home Supervision Program, field teams for community supervision seven days a week and during the evening hours in all areas of

IV - 23

the County and focusing on identified "hot spots7'. The additional staffing will allow community contacts in accordance with the program design. The program design anticipates at least daily contact with the highest risk offenders and at least twice weekly contacts with lower risk participants. Through the CPA 2000 funds, the ratio of staff to minors can be reduced from approximately 1 :30 minors to 1 : 15. The staffing ratio of 1 : 15 would allow at least five contacts per week, including daily contacts on weekends, holidays and take corrective action to prevent significant technical program violations that present a threat to the safety of the community or present a flight risk from court.

The Group Supervisor 111, in addition to supervising program participants, will have responsibility as the lead oficer to assist with staff supervision and training, and monitoring the collection of outcome data. The Supervisor of that program is responsible for four other programs and has a span of control of 18 staff. That span of control is too large for effective supervision of field officers. A lead oficer, who also manages a caseload, is a cost effective approach to staff development and on the job subordinate training.

Funding will also be used to finance the first year of a three-year lease purchase of a modular unit to house the entire Home Supervision unit as well as the other Alternatives to Incarceration program staff Although the Alternative to Incarceration programs (Day Commitment Center, Work Project, Graffiti Abatement Program and Home Supervision) operate under one Supervisor, staff are currently housed in several locations that are not adjacent to key personnel and partners.

A contract and treatment plan will be developed for all participants. Participants who are not enrolled in school will be directed to the Day Commitment Center; participants who have been ordered to attend drug and alcohol counseling will be referred to appropriate agencies to initiate compliance with those conditions; participants with orders to pay restitution will be given assistance in the job readiness and search skills, etc. For optimum program efficiency, coordination of resources and proper supervision, Alternative to Incarceration staff should be housed in one location that is accessible to the Supervisor, one another, and to the collaborative partners.

Outcome Objectives and Measures This program relates to the Local Juvenile Justice Strategy Objective 3 ; Outcome Measure 3.1, increased intensive supervision. The objectives of the expanded Home Supervision program are to meet the following mandated objectives:

1. Reduce recidivism of participants by ensuring school attendance and concentrating supervision in "hot spots7' for juvenile crime during critical hours and on weekends.

2. Increase the rate of successfbl completion of probation through enhanced offender accountability.

3. Increase the rate of compliance with court orders for restitution. 4. This program will not address community service since it is not ordered by the Stanislaus

County Juvenile Court.

In addition to the legislatively mandated outcomes, we expect to:

1. Improve the rates of school enrollment and attendance for participants; 2. Ensure that at least 95% of the participants appear for scheduled court hearings while

involved in the program. IV - 24

The goals include:

The probation violation rate for program participants within six months of program entry will be less than for juveniles released fi-om Juvenile Hall after being detained pending a court hearing for the six month period following release fiom Juvenile Hall. 75% of program participants will not be arrested for new law violations within six months of program completion, and their arrest rate for new law violations during this time-period will decrease compared to the 6-month period prior to program entry. 85% of program participants will be enrolled and attending school while involved in the program, and their attendance rate during this time period will increase compared to the 6-month period prior to program entry. 95% of program participants will attend their scheduled court hearings while enrolled in the program. 70% of program participants will be enrolled in and attending school or will have attained a GED or high school diploma six months after completing the program, and their attendance rate for the 6-month period following program exit will increase compared to the 6-month period prior to program entry. 80% of program participants will successfblly complete probation within 12 months from program entry, and their rate of successfbl completion of probation will be higher than for juveniles released from Juvenile Hall after being detained pending a disposition hearing (for the 12-month period following release from Juvenile Hall). The incarceration rate for program participants for the 6-month period following program exit will be less than for juveniles released fiom Juvenile Hall after being detained pending a disposition hearing (for the 6-month period following release from Juvenile Hall). The completion of restitution rate for program participants for the 12-month period from program entry will be higher than for juveniles released from Juvenile Hall after being detained pending a disposition hearing (for the 6-month period following release fiom Juvenile Hall). The rate of completion of court-ordered community service will not be tracked because the Juvenile Court for this County does not order community service.

To measures the goals, we will track:

1) Arrest rates for new law violations six months prior to program entry, during the program and for six months post program completion;

2) Rate of successfbl completion of probation 12 months post program entry and compare it to the completion rate 12 months post release from Juvenile Hall for minors who are released fiom Juvenile Hall after being detained pending disposition hearings;

3) Rate of successfbl completion of court ordered restitution and compare it to the rate for juveniles who were released from Juvenile Hall after being detained pending disposition hearings;

4) Rate of attendance at scheduled court hearings; 5) Rate of enrollment and attendance in school for 6 months prior to program entry,

during the program participation and for 6 months after program completion; 6) Probation violation rate for the 6 month period fi-om program entry and compare

it to the rate for juveniles who are released fiom Juvenile Hall after being detained

pending disposition hearings for the 6 month period following release fiom Juvenile Hall;

7) Incarceration rate for the 6-month period fiom program entry and compare it to the rate for juveniles who are released fiom Juvenile Hall after being detained pending disposition hearings for the 6-month period following release fiom Juvenile Hall.

In order to ensure proper collection of data to support the required outcome measures for program evaluation, maintain budgetary oversight of hnding mechanisms, and administer proper placement of minors throughout the juvenile system into CPA 2000 programs, salaries and benefits have been prorated across CPA 2000 programs for a Probation Manager and an Account Technician. Evaluation and data collection have been prorated in a like manner and are also included in each budget.

Program Costs

Existing program budget $369,278

Salaries and Benefits 20% of Senior Group Supervisor 25% Group Supervisor 111 4 FTE Group Supervisor I1 1 FTE Administrative Clerk I1

Services and Supplies $65,528

Included in this category are he1 and service for vehicles, officer safety equipment, telephones, pagers, radios, computers, workstations and general ofice supplies.

Professional Services $4 1,640 Electronic Monitoring contract service for 2000

Expansion Budget Using CPA 2000 Funds $457,941

Salaries and Benefits $260,99 1

(I) FTE Group Supervisor 111 (1) FTE Group Supervisor 11 29% Probation Manager 29% Accounting Technician 29% Evaluation 29% Data Collection

Services and Supplies $94,650

The services and supplies budget includes two vehicles and fuel, cellular phones, pagers, radios and safety equipment for the additional staff, four laptop computers, one workstation, including computer, for the GS 111 and general office supplies.

Two additional vehicles will provide for the extended services in the community and allow four of the six oficers to be in the field supervising minors at all times. The program does not have laptop computers currently. Having a laptop in each of the four vehicles in the field will allow oficers to remain in the community while they input and access case information. The data will be downloaded into the mainframe via desktop computers in the program headquarters after the shift ends.

Facility: 36' X 40' modular building, 1 yr. lease $102,300 including installation and site preparation, signage, an alarm system and safety lighting.

The justification for the inclusion of a modular building is included in the Program Expansion section. We are proposing a three-year lease- purchase of the building. We are aware that CPA 2000 funds are only for one year. The department is committed to paying the remainder of the lease-purchase if there is not an extension of the state program. In summary, the Home Supervision officers, Supervisor, clerical support and partnering officers in the Alternatives to Incarceration Program should be co-located to maximize program efficiency, oversight, data collection, staff training and cross communication efforts. Currently, staff are spread over various locations, which inhibits the best utilization of staff resources and coordinated field activities.

Total CPA 2000 Costs: $457,941

Total Program Costs For Existing And Enhanced Program: $827,219

Implementation Schedule and Timeframes Expansion of this program will be initiated when fbnding is approved and can be completed within 90 to 120 days.

The preparation of the facility site will be initiated simultaneously with the recruitment of staff. Supplies, including workstations, computers, etc, will be available within 30 days of the order. Vehicles will be ordered as soon as hnds are available and delivery should be complete within 90 days of the order.

All staff should be selected, equipped and trained within 120 days fiom the approval for funding. The County has an active list of applicants for the Group Supervisor III position that will be available until approximately January 2002. Staff should be capable of delivering all program components within 30 days of selection. It is anticipated that the complete selection process, including the background checks will require approximately 90 days. Staff for Home Supervision will be reassigned fiom existing Juvenile Hall personnel and will have completed Juvenile Institutions CORE Training.

The facility site can be prepared in approximately 60 days and the modular unit installed within 60 days subsequent to the site preparation. If stafXng is available in less than 120 days, they will

be located in existing facilities. The delivery of the field supervision expansion will not be delayed awaiting the completion of the facility.

Timeline Timeline for implementation activities is as follows:

1 . Site preparation- April through May 200 1 2. Building instillation-May through June 200 1 3. Recruit and train staff-April through June 200 1 4. Develop program procedure-June 200 1

It is anticipated that implementation activities will be completed by July 1, 200 1.

PRIORITIZED LIST OF JUVENILE JUSTICE PROGRAMS PROPOSED FOR FUNDING

Priority 1 - Day Reporting Center

PROGRAM COSTS/ CPA 2000 F u m m ~

Priority 2 - High Risk Offender Program $393,029

Priority 3 - Neighborhood Accountability Boards $95,529

Priority 4 - Home Supenision $457,941

Total: $1,559,383

Council Members: Robert Allaire Stanislaus Chief Executive Office

k~!?&$?&islaus County

James Brazeiton Stanislaus County Didrid Attorney

Paul Caruso Stanislaus County Board of Supenrim

R "RifhM tvbon kaniilaus an M i g AuWi

Richard Cuny. Ph.D. California State niversity, Staniskus

Linda L Duffy Stanislaus County Probation

Terry Elliott Stanislaus County District I Representative

lames C Enochs Superintendent, Modesto Gty Schools

Beverly Finley Stanislaus County Health Services Agency

Richard Jacobs Valley Mountain Regional Center

f $ k Y t y Comnmunity

Judy Kindle Sierra Vista Children's Center

Mastin 5 County D i d 2

L,. - m m

Lee Honor6 Means Stanislaus County P i 3 Representative

Co n'e ren -Peraza . ..- a d!8q &rams Administrator

Nan Oliva RN MS O* ale, "ah , i i i

@ G. Pete" t is aus County Supenntendent of

Larry B. Poaster, Ph.D. Stanislaus County Behavioral Health and Recovery S e w

Eloise Reyes Preiss Turlock School DrNicts

Carolyn Ratto Turicck City Coundl. County Schools Partnership

L lane Saldana, Ed.D. Modesto lunnr College

Katheryn Salter Stanislaus County D i 5 R e p n s e n m

Karen Servas YMCA of Stanisbus County

Honorable Marie Silveira Supenor Court

Lyndalee Whip le -'m c* EnnnUnbJ

fgency

STANISLAUS CHILDREN'S COUNCIL 830 SCEMC DRIW

MODESTO, CA. 95350 209.558-6219

FAX 209-558-6226

February 15,2001

Dear Members and Staff of the State Board of Corrections:

Children's Council Vice President and the Chair of the Stanislaus Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council Chief Probation Officer Linda Duffy presented an overview of the Crime Prevention Act 2000 (AB 19 13) and the proposed programs to the Children's Council at its February 14,2001 meeting.

The Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council hadeveloped a comprehensive plan to meet the requirements set forth in AB 19 13. The need for expanding and providing additional services for our at-risk and juvenile offender populations is apparent, and the proposed programs would fill that need. The Children's Council commends the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council for their efforts and wishes to express its support for the four (4) progr\ps proposed for h d i n g : Day Reporting Center, High Risk Offender and Juvenile Warrant Enforcement, Neighborhood Accountability Boards and expansion of the Home Supervision Program.

Sincerely,

st anislaus Children' s Council

Board of Supetvisors District 1 - Pat Paul

District 2 - Thomas Mayfield District 3 - Nick W. Blom

District 4 - Raymond Simon District 5 - Paul W. Caruso

Stanislaus Countv Board of Su~ervisors Renaissance 2000 Proiect August 2000 ,' ' , , , "

Stanislaus County is located in the northern Central Valley of California. Along with its . sister counties to the north and south, the County has transfom~ed its flat, fertile land into a -. -

rich agricultural orr rid or bordered by the coastal mountains to the west arid the Sieira Nevada footMs to the east. Long associated with orchards, vineyards, and farms in the most productive agricultural belt in the world, Stanislaus County is in transition from a - ,

largcly rural community to one that is more plurahstic. Today its population is found in rural environments but also in growing urban and suburban environments.

a The population of Stanislaus County in January 2000 was 441,400, up 1.4% from the i previous )rear. The largest city, Modesto, has 188,300, makmg it the largest population center. The second largest city, Turlock, has 53,500, followed by Ceres, with 32,950, Oakdale with 14,950, Riverbank with 14,600, Patterson with 10,950, Waterford with 6,775, ~rnrrnan with 6,375, and Ilughson with 3,620. In addition, 109,400, almost one in four, live

,

in un in~or~or~ ted areas, a number of which are surrounded by otadjacent to cities.

Using 1990 Census data and a.nnual birth, death, arid school enrollment data, the California State Department of Finances estimates that, as of 1998.66% of Stanislaus Countv's

I - ---/ -

is White, 25% is Hispanic, 6% is ~sian/~aci-fic Islander, 2% is African-American, *- and 1% is Native American. These figures indicate that Asian/Pacific Islander, African- American, and Native American populations have been static in the past decade, changing little if at all. During the same time period, there has been a moderate decrease in the White ~opulation and a moderate increase in the Hispanic population. In the past decade, there have been statewide percentage increases in Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander populations, due in part to immigration and in &rt to birth rates.

In Stanislaus County, a review of the population age O - 5 reveals a raciavethnic distribution noticeably different from that of the total population - and one that has implications for the fum-e. Children Now's California Data Book reports the following distribution in 1999 for chrldren age O - 5: 5 1% White, 4040 Hispanic, 1% AsiadPacific Islander; 290 African- American; and 1% Native American6. %rth certificate data indicate a trend towards an increasing percentage of chlldren born to Hispanic parents. For this reason, it is anticipated that the percentage of children who are Hispanic will soon exceed, if it does not already exceed, 5Ooh of all the births in the County on an annual basis.

5 State of ~dlifornia, Depament of l?inance. . ~~p://www.d~f.ca.~ov/dofhorne.hun. June 18,2000. &ntyNOw, Gunw Data Book 1999, page 108.

I - . ' , . . I - .

' :

0 Proiect Aumst 2000 . ' .., . . 5- ' - '.,'

E m p l o ~ m in the Corny in the p a t has been tied largely to agriculture with many jobs , both full-time seasond, in a y c d r a l production, food processing, agnnrltmd s ~ p p o n services, industrial manufacturing, and wa-ehoushg and distri botion. During the past 30 years there has been an increase in employment in retail trade, education, and government. Today private and public sector organizations are pamenng to haher diversify the .

economy, aiming to attract new businesses that complement existing ones but capitalize on the opportunities available though new technolow.

I I

In 1999,20.7% of children age 0 - 5 in Stanislaus ~ountyw&e.reci~ients of TANF pemporary Assistance to Needy Frmilies)8. The County has a higher percentage of poor

. , and very poor children compared to the state average. . '

It is in this context that the Renaissance 2000 Projea has been conduned. It is against backdrop that the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors will direct rhe investment of the Welfare-to-Work Incentive funds and the Tobacco Settlement h d s and the Stanislaus h t y Children and Families First Commission will direct the investment of the Children and Families Act funds.

Generally, the population centers statewide with the lowat rates of unemployment a, clustered dong the coast 2nd the population centers with the highest rates of mlemplopent are sttung throughout the Central Vdlq* Although double digit unemployment has been the status quo in Stanislaus Countymore often than not in the past decade, significant progress has been made. "Nan-farm employment in the Corny grew 20.3% wMe the California average was 1 m h g Stanislaus County's job creation greater than Santa Clara County in the hean of Silicon V d q i which grew 13.9% in the same period. Nationwide, Stanislaus County ranks first among the 125 largest metropolitan areas in job growth, averaging 3.596 growth a year over the pas 20 years."7 There is still significant work to be done and the reasons for this many and complex. Understanding the reasons has been elusive, as indicated in 'Gitid Lnks", an important stu+ of employment growth, unemployment and welfare-to-work in the County completed in 1998 by The Center for Public Policy studies ar Glifomia State University, Stanislaus. The study makes salient that 'conventional wisdomn about these matters does not alwa).s fully embrace the totality of the

-

issues.

1 he unemployment issue is closely associated with poverty, of course. In this era of welfare refom, with its emphasis on mwing people from welfare to work, there has been increasing scrutiny of those who live in poverty, both unemployed and employed. The closer look at the figures has brought with it a closer look at the faces &d lives behind th e figures. In Stanislaus County, 24.6Y0 percent of all children age O - 17 live in poverty, accordmg to data from ChiIdren Now. For children age 0 - 4, that figure increases to 27.9%, more than one in four.

' Wdson, Reagan. Augun 13, ZOOO "A View from the Other Side". Modesto Bee. ' Cdfornia Now, G u n m Data Book 1999. Page 108.

Renaissance Consulting Group, Sacramento, CA

I I FAMILY ECONOMICS

Median Family Income by RaceIEthnicity, I California Trend California*

Amencan Pacific Amencan lsiander

Race/ethnicity median income data are available for all family households only. Therefore, these data are distinct from the trend data presented, which are median income for a four-psrson family household. ** Due to limited survey sample size, reliable Native Arner- ican median income data are not available.

Souns.: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Hwsing and Household Economic Statistics. Population Branch, data from Current Population Survey. March 1999, U.S. Bureau of the Census. Housing and Household Economic Statistics. Population Branch, data from Current Population Survey, March 1998: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Housing and Household Economic Statistics, Population Branch. data fmm Current Population Survey. March 1997; U.S. Bureau of the Census. Housing and Household Economic Statistics. Population Branch, data fmm Current Population Survey. March 1996. available online: hnp:/~.census.gov/hheslincomel4per~0n.h~l.

4. Unemployed youth This indicator represents the number and per- centage of 16- to 19year-olds who are unem- ployed and are actively looking for work.

- -

I Number [ 177 1 162 I 159 1 139 1 (in thousands)

Unemployed youth

National Data: 13.9% of youth 1&19 years old were unemployed and looking for work in 1999. In 1996,16.7% of all youth were unem- ployed and looking for work.

State Rank: In 1999, California ranked 3 F of 50 states and tbe District of Columbia in the

23.1%

percentage of unemployed youth 1619 years old, compared to 4P of 50 states in 1996.

Unemployed Youth by RaceIEthnicity, California

30 1

20.6%

20

All 16.4% (19991

10

~fi- k i a n l Latino W e White &,,.rim pacific American

18.5%

~

Islander

16.4%

The Current Population Survey, the primary source f0l these data, does not support data anabes for these race/ethnic groups due to sample size limitations.

I I I I I 20 30 40 Wont 51

I Best 'O L - A . ~

8 I Children Now t32000 I

1 FAMILY ECONOMICS

Sources: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Geographic Pmfile of Ernployment and Unemployment 1999; U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Geographic Profile of Ernployment and Unernployment. 1998; U.S. Departmem of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 1997; U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 1996.

5. Children receiving TANF This indicator represents the average monthly number and percentage of all children ages 0 17 and adolescents ages 1017 receiving Tem- porary Assistance to Needy Families CANF), formerly Aid to Families with Dependent Chid-

,--. dren (AFDC).

California Trend

National Data: A monthly average of 5.0 mil- lion children, 72% of all children ages 0 to 17, received TAW services during fiscal year 1999 (October 1998 to September 1999). This is a decrease from 6.0 million and 8.7% during fiscal year 1998 (the first year for which com- plete participation data in the new public assis- tance Dromam were available). Prior to the . - implementation of the Personal Responsibity and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PROWA) of 1996,8.5 million children and 12.3% of aU childen in this age group received public assistance during fiscal year 1996.

Amonthly average of 1.5 million children ages 1017 (4.7%) received TANF during fiscal year 1999, compared to 2.0 million children ages 10 17 (6.5%) who received public assistance dur- ing fiscal year 1998. Prior to the implementa- tion of the PROWA, 2.7 million (9.0%) chiildren ages 1017 received public assistance during fiscal year 1996.

State Rank:

Children Ages 0-17: In 199899, California ranked 5 P of 50 states in the percentage of all children ages 017 receiving public assistance. In 1997-98, California also ranked 50th of 50.

Percentage of all children 0-17 receiving TANF

Number (in millions)

Percentage of all children 10.17 receiving TANF

Number

children Ages 10-17: In 199899, California ranked 5 P of 50 states in the percentage of all children ages 1017 receiving public assistance. In 1997-98, California also ranked 5 P of 50.

State Rank: Children Receiving TANF (Ages 0-17)

20.2%

1 .8

16.8%

600,000

I 1 I I

1 6851 10 20 30 40 Worst 51

State Rank: Children Receiving TANF (Ages 10-17)

I i I I I

1 B e ~ t 10 4 O - B 30 40 Waist 51

California: The State af Our Children 2000 1 9

16.7%

1.5

144%

528,000

15.2%

1.4

- 10.8%

399.000

I COUNTY DATA TABLES I

California children 1999, Ages 10-17

Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial lnyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonorna Stanislaus Sutter Teharna Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yo10 Yuba

African American

CALIFORNIA 294,828 7.6%

Native Asian Latino American White Total

S w w California Deparhnent of Finance, Demographic Rewarch I hnpJrlwww.dof.c..gov/HTMLIDEOGRAPlFlrce.htrn.

Jnit. RacdEthnic Populatlon with Age and Sex Detail, 1970-2040, December 1998, available

44 1 Children Now 02000

I COUNTY DATA TABLES I -

Teen births Ages 15-19,1996-1998

1996-1998 1996-1998 Average Average 19981998 1996 1996 1997 1997 1998 1998

teen births teen birth rate Average rank Births Rate Births Rate Births Rate

Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calave ras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Hurnboldt Imperial lnyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba

CALIFORNIA 60,370 57.1 63,118 61.6 59,851 56.7 58,141 53.2

Due to small numbem mllable rat- can not be u l c u l l e ~ I - 5 5 of 58 countbe ranked.

Swrrr: Unpubllrhed vltal data fmm Califomla Department of Health Stati.tiu. Office of Health Information and Rrearch, Vital Statlstiu Section. May 2000; Callfornla Department of Flnanca, Demogmphlc Research Unit, RacwEthnlc Population wlth Age and Sex Detail, 197&204Q, December 1999, available onllne: httpJ/www.dof.w.govMTMUDEMOGRAP/R~~.htm.

46 1 Children N& 02000

- - - - - -

Mont!'

- - 1 -- - -- 1 35 i 17

_ - - _ _ -- - - I - - - --

-- - 10

Weapons - *Felony -- --- -- *Misdemeanors

- . -- - -- - --

-- .- -- .

15 10 - 6 1Zi -- 13 - 12 131 --- -

5 3 2 5 3 3 7 47 4 - . - --

20 14 12 14 7 1 8 17 18 1 s 205 - * Relative -- 3 0 6 1 9 5 9 56 7

Selflother -- -- -- - -- 5 4 2 6 3 I 5 2 1 37 1

Family Criminality -

Parent -- -- - -- Sibling

3 3

.-

9

2

-

1

-

16 10

Relative 1 1

18

10 -

10 10 9

2

10

1

I -

-- -- 17 13 - -- 168.

15

10 2 2

13 1

--- 6 2

-

Family Ethnic Background Caucasian - - AfrolArnerican -- - - Asian -

Latino - - - - -- Other - -

School-- -- - --

. 3 0

17 2 3

15 1

-

8

Comprehensive Site - - - - - -- - -- Alternative Site Habitual Truant

-- - -- -- Age- _ - -

12 & Under --_ _ - _ _ _ -_______- 13 to 15 - - --

16 thru 18

- 2 2 1

13 1 I

15 0

11

14 2 2

13 0

13

10 5 0 -- 8 2

- 2

8 14 2

- --

19 2

- 1 18 3

I

2 1 3 3

18 2

2 1 18 3

12 2 0

20 0

27 10 6

20 0

19 7 22 - 9 20 17 165 16 -

34 17 18' --A 16 25 23 24 1 23. -

-- 7 ---- 3 3 2 3 2 3 1 0 33 _. _ - --- - -- --

-1-

21 1 2

17 3

0 10 15

- -- - - - - - --- 12

- -- -- - 0

17 30

24 4 0

- 16 5 -

3 0 1

20 -

3 1

18 2

0 1 3 - 2 12 0

-

208 - -- 37 21

191 19

180 - - - - - - - 11 12 -- 1

I 39 15 -- 19 14

1 - _ - -

16

-- l4 - 17

17 23 7 29 32 25 1 284

I Female Wardship _ i Month - _

- - --- - I _ - - - - Orginal-Wardship _ _ -

=n"t wardship . -

Prior- Wardship 7

Prior Informal - - -_

, 0 0 I -- - -- - - 1

1r- *M&!!emeanors --- _ A _ -

--- - - - -- - - - I 1 ---- -

Family___ -- - - _- -- - -- - --

Intact

0 2 I 0 0 1- - - 0

-

1 2 3 1 - - -

0

_ Family Ethnic Background -- - -- -- - - Caucasian -- - --- 0 6 5 I AfroIAmerican 0 1 Asian - - - - - - - -- --

0 0 0 Latino p- - - -- - - -- - -

3 3 3

Other- 0 1 0 --- --

--

3 3 - 5 7 1 1 -. -- 3

ol- 1 6 - - - -- - -

I --

--

0 0

- -. - 7 4 3 2 2 16 thru 18 3 0 1 2 6 6 32

I Male I n f o r ~ l I --

~ o n t h -

0

Truancy_ A - - - -_ -- - I

-- 8 -

3 3 3 18 -

4 2 2

__I___-- 1 -- 3 2 1 4

-- - - I A

4 -- 4 I 3 1 1 1.L- - -

- -- 4 1 6 -

0 0 0

1 1 16 24

4 0 --

- - -- - - -- - y-

19 11 14 8 1 35 40 28 19 7 --A 8 - 14 8

2 1 0 1 -- 0 0 3 I -

--I --

12 & Under - --- - - -- -- 4 .- 1 8

4 -

54 7 --

13 to 15 -- -- - -- -- -- - 9 24 13 . _ 157 16 thru 18 I 6 21 33 18 21 0

CASE PROFILE

-M.aLz 6pta~cToTAZ.

FAMILY: .

' Mact , 'Step

Single ReMve Self / Other . .

. -

=C B~CKGROZ~~JD: I .

. . 4 ' '

Caucasian . . . . .

Mo/A.merican . . \

Asian '

Latino . I . . 33 . '.4/

Other . ; ' 2 I . . 3 . .

"

.-

Originalwardship .

Cont'd. award . .

Prior Wardship. Prior M o d .

OFFENSE:. Property :

'

Drug/Alc~)hol Violence Sex . .

.Traffic Weapons .

*Felonies *Misdemeanors-, . . . . .

6 .7 . / .L 2q /O

, 2-

11: $42.

~5 ' 8t . ... .

/o-' ..3i/ B- ./b - / 1.3

. Courtesy Supervision

2 3 . 7 4 : t /3

4-

. . SCHOOL: .'

. 7 7 . :

-

3

I./ 1 3+

Comprehensive Site Alterqative Site ' ' . '

. ,

HabitualT~nrant .

i . , .

/P a-- . 5

/L ;sq

& .

' 7 7 2

, /

' .

AGE:

&',--kc-

12&Under 3 t . s . - ' "13 To 15 16Thru18 ' 3.L. 9 ;.

modbee.com I COMMENTARY: A View from the Other Side Page 1 of 4

Action canceled

Thursday Mar. 29,2001

COMMENTARY: A View from the Other Side

Today's Letters

COMMENTARY: Attacks on UC Merced lack facts

By REAGAN WILSON (Published: Sunday, August 13, 2000)

On July 9, The Bee chastised city and county leaders for their lack of success when it comes to economic development. In its editorial, "Show Us the Jobs," The Bee challenged local officials to "Show us the effort, show us the money, show us the leadership. Show us the results."

It's clear The Bee is unaware of the considerable accomplishments and efforts under way to improve the lives of all the residents through economic development. Consider the following well-documented statistics:

* From 1990-99, nonfarm employment in Stanislaus County grew 20.3 percent, while the California average was 11.8 percent. More new jobs were created in Stanislaus County during that time period than in San Joaquin County, Fresno County and Santa Clara County in the heart of the Silicon Valley, which grew 18.9 percent.

* Nationwide, Stanislaus County ranks 15th among the 125 largest metropolitan areas in job growth, averaging 3.5 percent growth a year over the past 20 years.

* The county's unemployment rate has dropped steadily since 1993, when it peaked at 19.4 percent in February of that year. The lowest recent rate was in September 1999, when it fell to 7.2 percent.

* The number of families receiving welfare has plummeted. Between March 1995 and May 2000, the number of families receiving aid dropped from 16,362 to 9,240, a 43.5 percent -1 - - .- - - - -

http://www.modbee. com/opinion/letters/sto/ 1,1270,185 846,OO. html

Pathetic iustice

Shared res~onsibility

Optional enhancement

Send Us Letters

modbee.com I COMMENTARY: A View fi-om the Other Side

aecrease.

* The median household income has gone up about 25 percent in the last 10 years, increasing from $32,500 in 1990 to $43,900 in 2000, according to the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. And while Stanislaus County's economy isn't burning down the house, as compared to someplace like Silicon Valley, many more local residents can buy a home here.

The results are the product of a well-planned, collaborative economic development program; good land-use decisions; and making sure our existing businesses are treated like customers by the nine cities in the county. Consider some of the ways the results have been achieved:

* The county and other agencies have spent time and money studying the impacts of policy decisions. The studies include "Strategic Directions," "Critical Links," the "Job Creation Plan," the Interstate-5 Corridor Industrial- Business Park Feasibility Study and others. Together, these studies address the county's strengths and weaknesses, identify the makeup of the unemployed, suitable job creation activities and some of the best areas for business park development.

Accompanying these studies is a proposed transportation plan that emphasizes the movement of goods and services and a countywide telecommunications infrastructure plan.

* In the last several years, Stanislaus County:

-- Has partnered with the city of Patterson to open up 465 acres of land for development near Speny Road and Interstate 5.

-- Will add more than 1,400 acres of industrial- commercial land when the Salida Community Update Plan is approved later this summer. The county's effort at increasing the amount of industrially zoned land will complement Modesto's 600-acre Kiernan Industrial Park.

-- Opened up 300 acres of land in Ceres for business park development when it extended sewer and water for the county's Agricultural Center. Many of the cities have made similar efforts at increasing the amount of land available for development.

* Stanislaus County has invested heavily in traininn and rcltraininn thrn~lnh itc nclnartment nf

http://www.modbee.com~opinion/letters/sto/l, 1270,185846,OO. html

Page 2 of 4

modbee.com I COMMENTARY: A View fiom the Other Side Page 3 of 4

.IU*.l.l.a U e m Y . Y..U..IIIIg .I.I VYJI I I C V IYPI..C...Y... " 0

Employment and Training and Community Services Agency, allocating nearly $20 million last year alone to help the unemployed and underemployed develop marketable skills.

* The county formed a Red Tape Task Force several years ago to examine how it did business. As a result, the county streamlined its permitting and development processes, which have since become a model for other counties. Soon, businesses will be able to make applications via the Internet.

* The county and cities contribute to the Stanislaus County Economic Development Corp (SCEDCO), which works to retain and expand local businesses, attract new businesses and facilitate funding for small businesses.

* The county, through persistent and skillful legislative work by Congressman Gary Condit, secured the transfer of Crows Landing Naval Air Station for development as an air cargo and manufacturing center.

* And finally, the county formed the Workforce Investment Board, a countywide, publioprivate partnership designed to coordinate economic development.

These are just some of the steps the county has taken to encourage economic development. And it plans to continue, particularly in the areas of enterprise zones, foreign trade zones, business attraction, forming regional partnerships and, of course, training.

The county and cities will continue to streamline bureaucracy, improve customer service, develop a better work force, and encourage expansion of existing businesses and development of new ones through low-cost loans, sharing taxes to promote joint economic development efforts and establishing enterprise zones.

While The Bee has the right to demand results, it too has a role to play. It can be a partner in this community effort of improving the quality of life for all residents by being realistic, staying informed, and promoting a perspective of positive progress, instead of promoting negative messages about our outstanding communities.

Wilson is chief executive officer of Stanislaus County.

STAN 88.1 COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY - ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS MONTHLY SUMMARY CASE ACTIVITY'FOR THE MONTH ENDING: December-00 DATE: 02/05/01

COMPLETED BY: Kristi Garcia 558-2867

1 CASELOAD ACTIVITY RECEIVED AID AID REQUESTED

PROGRAM Bb3GETED START OPEN END . DEC DEC ICT PENDING RECEIVED CLOSED PENDING CASELOAD OF DURING OF 2000 1999 IPT START OF DURING DURING END OF

MONTH MONTH MONTH CASES1 CASES1 MONTH MONTH MONTH MONTH

I

i !

1 The ch~idren of I

! Stanislaus Countv

Stanislaus County has a higher per- centage of poor and very poor chil- dren compared to the state average. From 1995 to 1997, the county's per- centage of infants born at low birth- weight increased each year as did the couky's infant mortality rate. During that time period, the rate of births to teens declined. The county has a slightly higher rate of child abuse re- ports than the state average and a substantially lower rate of children in foster care.

Children Now California Couniy Data Book '99

Total Children Young child Young child ETHNlClTlES (1998) population pop. (0-17) pop. (0-5) eth. diversity Al I 434,835 African-American 8,267 Asian 26,93 1 Latino 108,454 Native American 4,152 White 287,03 1

TOTAL NUMBER OF BIRTHS (1997) 6,790

CHILDREN LIVING IN POVERTY Children Children (1995) Ages 0-17 Ages 0-4

Percent 24.6% 27.9%

Percent Percent CHILDREN RECEMNGTANF Ages 0-17 Ages 0-5 (1998)

Al I 18.4% 20,7% African-American 52.4% 61.1% Asian 32.8% 23.3% Latino 19.0% 20.8% Native American 1 1.9% 13.6% White 14.7% 18.7%

CHILDREN RECEIVING WIC ASSISTANCE (1997- Ages 0-4)

Number of participants Percent of all eligible

FA1 R MARKET RENT (1998) Two bedroom-' $562 As percent of minimum wage 58.6%

BABIES BORN TO MOTHERS WITH 1 (12 YRS. OF EDUCATION (1997) Number Percent

Al I African-American Asian Latino Native American White

CHILD CARE Cost/rnonth-infant $520 NA $481 Cost/month-preschool $390 NA $382 Child care centers: 7% . NA 7%

% spaces for infants

CHILD SUPPORT 1996 1997 1998 - -

Percent cases with orders 70% 75% 77% Money collected mo.1 $87 $91 $92

case with order

LATE/NO PRENATAL CARE 1995 1996 1997

All 4.1% 3.1% 3.4% African-American 3.6% 4.7% 3.8% Asian 4.3% 3.1% 2.7% Latino 4.7% 3.6% 4.5% Native American 9.6% 2.9% 1.4% White 3.5% 2.5% 2.6%

PERCENT LOW BIRTHWEIGHT INFANTS 1995 1996 1997 All 5.9% 6.1% 6.6% African-American 9.5% 14.5% 16.5% Asian 7.5% 10.4% 9.8%

oo Latino 5.5% 5.2% 6.2% I Native American 8.4% 4.3% 2.8% td White 5.7% 5.9% 6.2%

l NFANT MORTALITY RATES b r 1.000) 1995 1996 1997

All 5.9 6.8 7.1 African-American 6.0 34.9 19.0 Asian 4.6 7.3 8.0 Latino 5.1 4.4 8.1 Native American 0.0 0.0 0.0 White 6.9 7.7 5.6

TEEN Bl RTH RATES (per 1,000) 1995 1996 1997

All 69.8 67.2 62.1 African-American 83.6 105.1 82.4 Asian 48.5 44.1 37.4 Latino 124.1 121.0 111.7 Native American 134.3 96.6 125.0 White 44.5 42.1 39.9

MOTHERS WHO INITIATE EXCLUSIVE BREASTFEEDI NG 1997

Percent 45%

CLASSROOMS 1996 1997 1998 % eligible in Head Start NA 43.8% NA Average class size 29.4 28.3 28.0 Per pupil expenditure $3,955 $4,246 $4,627

I STUDENT PROFICIENCY 1997 1998 1999 -- -

Students with limited 18% 18% NA English Proficiency

% of 3rd graders reading 43% 47% at or above national avg.

% of 3rd graders scoring 43% 52% (math) at or above national avg.

PUBLIC Ll BRARl ES --- -- - -

Monthly hours open (Per 100 young children) 5.5 Preschool programs (per 100 young children) 1.5

FOSTER CARE RATES (1997-per 1,000) Ages 0-1 7 Ages 0-5

All 5.0 4.4 African-American 23.4 19.6 Asian 0.8 0.7 Latino 4.1 3.1 Native American 0.9 0.0 White 5.4 5.3

( CHILD ABUSE (1- 1 Number of reports Rate (per 1,000)

GUN INJURIES & DEATHS (IW) Ages 0-17 Ages 0-5

Injuries 15 2 Deaths 3 0

MOTOR VEHICLE INJURIES & DEATHS (1998) Ages 0-17 Ages 0-5

Injuries 979 135 Deaths 6 0

Family Economics Children living in poverty (0-17) 38 I 58 Children living in poverty (04) 4 1 I 58 Children receiving TANF ( ~ ' 1 7 ) 38 I 58 Children receiving TANF (0-5) 37 1 58 Children receiving WIC assistance 32 I 58 Fair market rent as % of min. wage 26 / 58 Mothers wl < 12 yrs education 39 I 5 5 Child care costlmonth-i&nt 15 / 38 Child care costlmonth-preschool 24 I 52 Child care: % spaces fbr i&ts G / 47 Child support: % cases wl orders 16 148 Child support: $ collected 20 1 48

Health Latelno prenatal care 20 I 49 Low birthweight i&nts 37 I 49 Infslt mortality 24 I 37 Teen births 39 I 52 Mothers who initiate exclusive

breastFeeding 39 I 58

Education Percent of eligible 3-4 year olds

in Head Start 37 I 57 Average class size 55 I 5 8 Per pupil expenditure 56 I 58 Percent of 3rd graders reading at

or above nat'l average 39 158 Percent of 3rd graders scoring

(math) at or above nat'l average 31 / 58 Public libraries: Monthly hours open 39 I 58 Public libraries: Preschool programs 27 1 56

Safety Foster care rate (0-1 7) 19 157 Foster care rate (0-5) 15 148 Child abuse 21 I 5 8 Vehicle injuries & deaths (0-17) 33 1 55 Vehicle injuries & deaths (0-5) 37 I 44

NA=Not Available NR=Not Ranked Please see Data Explanations NS=Not Shown section for more information

Children Now Cslilbmia Counry Data Book 'H

TABLE 4C JUVENILE MISDEMEANOR ARRESTS

BY GSNDER, OFFENSE AND ARREST RATE

STANISWUS COUNTY ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GENDER, OFFENSE AND RATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 - 1998 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JW, MISD-OR ARREST 3,744 3,803 3,751 3,316 3,546 4,475 4,156 4,021 3,600 3,277

W S L - V E X 1 1 1 3 ASSAULT AND BATTERY 780 783 888 791 778 753 836 857 785 7 61 PETTY THEFT 1,176 1,210 1,244 964 1,142 1,219 1,112 1,019 888 818 OTHER THEFT 11 18 13 11 12 4 7 12 20 6 CK/ACC CARDS 2 1 5 2 4 2 1 2 1

MhRIJUANA OTRER DRUGS INDECENT EXPOSURE ANNOYING CHILDN!m OBSQGNE MATTER

LBND CONDUCT PROSTITVTION CONT DEL MINOR DRUNK LIQUOR LAWS

DISORDERLY CONDUCT * 40 24 30 26 16 28 13 10 10 10 a DISTURBING TtE =CE 310 256 20 8 174 172 235 226 168 167 172

VANDALISM 362 481 382 413 505 514 523 524 372 345 I MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 19 12 15 14 11 12 9 20 6 8

P TRESPASBING 99 135 192 129 99 150 129 181 171 113

WEAPONS 57 43 38 46 46 8 9 85 102 7 4 65 D R N E UNDm IN?% 55 58 37 30 33 32 33 35 43 40 HIT-AND-RUN 24 13 22 22 27 24 2 4 19 34 10 WLECTtD TRAFFIC VIOL 50 44 38 29 25 30 37 41 5 2 4 3 JOY RIDING 60 51 5 6 67 32 61 57 9 5

-LING 1 1 NONSUPPORT 2 GLUE rnIFFING 1 1 3 3 1 1 2 1 C I T Y / C O W ORDINANCE 7 0 136 5 4 98 167 611 80 65 50 3 8 ETA-NOlU TRAFFIC 60 60 47 52 12 2 7 18 30 2 9 15 OTHER 138 124 138 123 132 156 257 336 247 199

STATUS OI'FENSES 179 177 232 206 215 814 750 540 174 2 62

POP AC;E 10 TERU 17 (THOU-S)

ARREST RATE PER 100,000 ----_----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FOOTNOTES

http:.

TABLE 3C JUVENILE FELONY ARRESTS

BY GENDER, OFFENSE AND ARREST RATE

STANISLAUS COUNTY ----_----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GENDER, OFFENSE AND RATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JW. FELONY ARRESTS 1,608 1,795 1,855 1,858 1,629 1,713 1,954 1,999 1,708 1,506

MA&E FEMALE

VIOLENT OFTENSES HOMICIDE * FORCIBLE RAPE ROBBERY M W T * KIDNAPPING

PROPERTY OFFENSES 983 1,092 1,062 1,068 894 1,041 1,110 1,150 954 801 BURGLARY 507 540 595 519 452 507 592 569 487 402 THGFT 229 284 250 247 173 228 253 268 221 182 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 194 193 158 24 3 227 249 196 274 205 165 PORG CKS/ACC CARDS 16 20 18 21 10 11 19 19 10 14 ARSON 37 55 41 38 32 4 6 50 2 0 31 3 8

DRUG OFFENSES NARCOTICS MARIJUANA DANGGROOS DRUGS OTHER

\D

I SEX OFFENSES LEWD OR LASCNIOUS

W OTHSR

OTHER OITENSXS WEAPONS DRIVE UNDER INFL HIT-AND-RUN ESCAPE BOOKMAKING OTHER

POP AGE 10 THRV 17 (THOU8ANDS)

TOTAL: RATE PER 100,000 V I O U N T OFFENSES PROPERTY OFFENSES DRUG OBY%NSEB BM O r n N S E S OTHER OFFENSES -----------_---------------------------------------------------------_------------------------------------------------------------------

FOOTNOTES

http.

Date: 18 Jan 2001 To: Fin Johnson, Lieutenant of Police Subject: Juvenile Arrest within the City of Turlock, 1999

Summary:

Turlock Police Services, Crime Analysis Unit, has as requested, reviewed all Juvenile arrests during the calendar year of 1999 for our entire city, by beat. The crime type activity included in this report is all Delinquent Acts, cited, booked or neither. Misdemeanors Acts, cited, booked or neither. Felony Acts, cited, booked or neither, with the following results.

In calendar year 1999,

Beat One had a combined arrest total for both juveniles and adults of 197 arrests. Of the 197 persons arrested on beat one, 116 or 37% were juveniles.

Beat Two had a combined arrest total for both juveniles and adults of 571 arrests. Of the 571 persons arrested on beat two, 158 or 22% were juveniles.

Beat Three had a combined arrest total for both juveniles and adults of 1,068 arrests. Of the 1,068 persons arrested on beat three, 198 or 16% were juveniles.

Beat Four had a combined arrest total for both juveniles and adults of 427 arrests. Of the 427 persons arrested on beat four, 146 or 25 % were juveniles.

Total arrests for beats 1-4 based on Turlock Police Services main database for 1999 was 2,264 total combined juvenile and adult arrests. Of the 2,264 persons arrested 61 8 or 21 % were juveniles.

Crime Analysis has further determined that among juvenile arrests only, beat 1 had 19% of the total juvenile arrests. Beat 2 had 26% of the total juvenile arrests. Beat 3 had 31% of the total juvenile arrests, and beat 4 had 24% of the total juvenile arrests.

Further review of 1999 arrest statistics show that combined, beat 1 had 9% of the total juvenileladult arrests. Beat 2 had 25% of the total juvenileladult arrests. Beat 3 had 47% of the total juvenileladult arrests, and beat 4 had 19% of the total juvenileladult arrests.

Samuel Turco Crime Analyst Turlock Police Services

lyDe of Arrest

1: Delinquent Act Cited

2: Delinquent Act Booked

3: Delinquent Act Neither Cited or Booked

4: Misdemeanor Cited [Incl 849bl

5: Misdemeanor Booked [Incl849bl

6: Misdemeanor Neither Cited or Booked

7: Felony Cited [Incl849bl

8: Felony Booked [Incl 849bl

9: Felony Neigher Cited or Booked

JUVENILE

ADULTlJUV COMBINED

197

571

1068

427

2263

BEAT Beat One

Beat Two

Beat Three

Beat Four

Total:

" Beat One Beat Two Beat Three Beat Four

JUVENILE

116

158

198

146

618

--

ADULTIJUV COMBINED

" Beat One Beat Two Beat Three Beat Four

- ~~JUVENILE BADULTIJUV COMBINED /

1500

1000

500

0 Beat One Beat Two Beat Three Beat Four

Turlock Police Services Crime Analysis Unit

Analysis Report

Date: 22 November ZOO0 To: Fin Johnson, Lieutenant of Police Subject: Juvenile Crime within the City of Turlock, 1998 - 1999

Summary:

Turlock Police Services, Crime Analysis Unit, has as requested, reviewed all Juvenile Crime between the calendar years of 1998 through 1999 for our entire county. The cities included in this report are Turlock, Modesto, Riverbank, Ceres, Hughson, Newman, Oakdale, Patterson, Waterford, CSU Stanislaus, and the California Highway Patrol, with the following results.

I i The City of Turlock, for the past two years, has ranked third overall in Juvenile Crime within 1- Stanislaus County. C.A.U. has focused only on Felony Crimes that involve Juveniles, and found that

10% of all felony crime takes place within our city limits. Turlock falls behind the City of Modesto and all unincorporated areas of our county.

111 In calendar year 1998, Turlock produced 205 total felonies involving juveniles, 651 behind the City of Modesto, and 327 behind the Stanislaus County Sheriffs jurisdiction.

111

Ill In calendar year 1998, Turlock produced 176 total felonies involving juveniles, 570 behind the City of Modesto, and 321 behind the Stanislaus County Sheriffs jurisdiction.

Based on percent of juvenile felonies within Stanislaus County, for the calendar year 1998, Modesto ranks number one with 43%, followed by all Stanislaus County S.O. jurisdictions, with 27%, and then the City of Turlock, with 10%. Juvenile felony crime, for the above three jurisdictions combined, for calendar year 1998, is 80% of all juvenile felony crime.

I For calendar year 1999, Modesto, a second time ranks number one with 4290, followed again by all Stanislaus County jurisdictions with 28%, and then again, the City of Turlock, with 10%. This trend once more indicates that 80% of all juvenile felony crime is taking place within the three jurisdictions.

The nearest jurisdiction to the City of Turlock, in Juvenile Crime, is the City of Ceres. In 1998 Ceres had 123 total felonies, and in 1999,140 total felonies.

This data has inferred, and analysis has proven, that all the other listed cities within the county, including CSU Stanislaus, and the California Highways within this county, all comhined, total just 20% of all felony juvenile crime.

1 Several reports reviewed by Turlock Police Crime Analysis has shown that many Stanislaus County Jurisdiction felonies, involving juveniles, have occurred just outside the Turlock City Limits, indicating that these crimes are being committed by Turlock juveniles.

In addition to felony crimes, CAU has reviewed misdemeanor juvenile crimes for the same calendar years, and found that in 1998 the City of Modesto had 1,755 total juvenile crimes, followed as expected by all Stanislaus County Jurisdictions, with 893, and then the City of Turlock with 485.

In 1999, misdemeanor crime involving only juveniles, in Modesto, was 1,563, Stanislaus County jurisdictions had 893, and the City of Turlock had 429.

Turlock Police Services, Crime Analysis Unit, has also completed a full analysis on where juvenile crime is taking place within our city. All studies reveal that most of our juvenile crime is concentrated on beats 2 and 3, south of Canal Drive, past the city limits and into Stanislaus County.

A review of juvenile arrest reports, for the northern areas of our city, display that the majority of suspects arrested, for criminal activity, are also from the same two above listed heats.

See affached forms and charts for comuarison data between all cities within Stanislaus Countv.

Samuel Turco Crime Analyst Turlock Police Services -

111

10 - D

Y r 1 9 9 8 Turlock Y r 1 9 9 9 Turlock 1 L. - : I

40

30 ~

20

10

0 ~

I Homicide Rape 1 Robbery 1 Assault Burglary Then Motor Other

I I Vehicle Drugs crime

I ~ ~ r 1 9 9 8 Turlock 0 1 1 5 14 36 25

b ~ r 1 9 9 9 Turlock

28

10

48 48

15 42 38 0 2 1 31 3 35

98 1 ifelonvl 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I O/. of Crime I No.

Patterson 0 0 8 16 17 3 2 1 58 58 3% 116

Waterford 0 0 0 9 8 1 3 1 4 1 26 26 1 % 66

CSU Stanislaus 0 0 0 2 0 I 0 0 0 I 3 3 0% 6

- - -

Y e a r l 9 ~ ~ , . .. , . - . . -. . . . . . of [Misd.]

I CHP I 0 1 0 1 O I 1 1 0 1 0 1 1

Aoencv Involved I Homicide I Raw I Robberv I Assault I Bumlaw I Theft I Vehicle Theft I Druas I Other I Total Crime I Total Fel.

Count

Turloc

Turlock 1 0 I I I 5 1 3 6 48 1 2 5 1 48 1 14 1 28 1 205 1 205 1 10% I 485 In County

'or Year '

Level Crimes

! f ,

i i CSU Stanislaus i i

i Waterford I

Patterson cHp D 58 I 1

1

i

I

Oakdalt

Newman 1 3 4

Modest1

: Hughso~

i 1 Ceres , 7 1 2 3 /

Riverbank

600 900 ~ !

] 856

I I i

Y 1532

i k = 1:

. . . , ~ . ~ . ~ ~.

iile Fel. F 'or Year 1

I

I CSU Stanislaus I 0

Waterford 8 b I Patterson

Oakdale

Newman b 24

Modestc

Hughsor

Cerer

1 Riverbank 1 3 0

Count!

Turlocl

roo

Combine Totals Vs. Turlock Total:

Stanislaus County 1793 Turlock 205

1998 Year 1998

ity of

Turlock

p~~ ~

BStanislaus Counry ,~-- -. ~

Turlock 7 - - -. . . .

~ --p ~~ ~ . ~~~- ~

Combine Totals Vs. Turlock Total:

Stanislaus County 1590 Turlock 176

1766 Year 1999

: Turl ock

L U Ul.

Combine Totals Vs. Turlock Total:

Stanislaus County 3606 Turlock 485

4091 Year 1998

ity 01 lock --I--

Vs. S ----

S tani P-. .

slaus . r . t r r

Combine Totals Vs. Turlock Total:

Stanislaus County 3322 Turlock 429

3751 Year 1999

ity 01 : Turl ock 1

.~ ~~. ~

LB Stanislaus County ~

T u r l o c k 2 - ~-~~ ~ - - - - -

--

Appendix D 154

REPORTING FORM Educational Options 0 jice

I f Calijbrnia Departmen of ducation

For the fourth year, California school districts are required by Mucation Code section 48916.1 to report the number of students recommended for expulsion, including the grounds for those recommendations, the number of students expelled, and whether the expulsion orders were suspended. Districts must also .report students' educational placements during and following their expulsion periods. The form below requests this information for the period of July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000.

Please provide the requested information and return this form to the California Department of Education by December 10, 2000. Questions and suggestions concerning this form should be referred to Rita Drummond, Staff Services Analyst, at (9 16) 323-2563. The reporting forms must be completed and returned whether or not there were any expulsions.

General Instructions: Complete only one Expulsion Information Reporting Form per district; Report data for the period of July 1, 1999, through June 30,2000; Have your superintendent or designee sign the completed form to certify the accuracy of the data; h d Submit the completed form no later than December 10,2000, to the following address:

Expulsion Report California Department of Education C/O SRA Associates 1105 Furlong Road Sebastopol, California 95472

Modesto City Schools 1 Stanislaus Countv 150-7 1175-000000 I

Randy Fillpot I Director 1209-576-4007 1709 576 4909 - - 1

James C. Enochs

12 - A

i

Table 1: ~ i o u n d s for Recommendations to Expel and Expulsion Orders

I '-.tmctions: For the period July 1,1999, through June 30,2000;under each Education Code sectiok, please enter the total ~ber of recommendations for expulsion, the total number of expulsions ordered, and the total number of suspended expulsions.

expulsion must be recommended before ordered, and ordered before suspendend Therefore, all suspended expulsions must also be counted under the uRecommended Expulsionsn and "Expulsions Ordered" columns. Indicate Education Code sections under which a student's expulsion was recommended. Recommendations for equlsion are issued exclusively by the principal. If a student was recommended for expulsion or expelled more than once during the period of July 1,1999, through June 30,2000, please include each recommendation andlor expulsion that occurred.

-- - - I ::ifi: jiy) Or I Committing or attempting to commit sexual assault or sexual battery I

48915 (c)(l)* 489 15 (c)(2)* 48915 (c)(3)*

1 48915 (a) (1) 1 Caused serious physical injuxy to another person 5 I 3 1 2-

Possessing, selling or furnishing a firrarm Brandishing a M e at another person UnIafillv selling a controlled substance

48915 (a)(2) 48915 (a)(3)

0 2 U

48915 (a;(4) Or

48900 (e

'15 (a)@)

48900 (a)(l)

48900 (a)(2)

--

Possession of knife, explosive or other dangerous object Unlawful possession of any controlled substance (not including alcohol)

48900 (c)

0 0 U

1 48900 @) Possessed, sold or firnished firearm, knife, explosive or other dangerous I object I 57 1 30 1 27

Robbery or extortion

Assault or battery upon any school employee Caused, attempted to cause, or threatened pllysical injury to another person Wilhlly used force or violence on another person

48900 (d) 48900 (0 48900 (& 48900 (h) 48900 (i)

48900 (j)

48900 (k)

48900 (I) 48900 (m) 48900 (0)

48900.2

48900.3

'900.4

-0900.7

0 2 u

56 1

Unla~vfdly possessed, used, sold, fiunislred or been under the influence of any controlled substance, dcol~olic beverage, or intosicant

1 2

46

85 47

, * Indicates oflenses for which erpuLsion ir mandatorv..- -

Selling or delivering material represented to be a controlled substance Caused or attempted to cause damage to sclrool or private property Stole or attempted to steal school property or private property Possessed or used tobacco or nicotine products Committed an obscene act or engaged in habitual profanity or vulgarity

- - - - - - - -

Unlawfully possessed, or unlawfblly offered or arranged to sell, dmg paraphernalia Disruption of scllooI activities or willfully defying the authority of school personnel Knowingly received stolen school property or private property Possession of an imitation fireann Harassed, threatened, or intimidated a pupil who is a witness Engaged in sexual harassment Attempted to cause, threatened to cause, or p'articipated in an act of hate violence Engaged in harassment, threats or intimidation against a pupil or group of pupils Made terrorist tlueats against school officials or school prope@

4 1 1

59

14 0

11

43

68 36

0 6 15

2 15

12

92 1 1

5 4

0

4 6

1

3

17 10

5 1 6

0 1 10

2 12

11

62 1 1

5 3

0

4 5

0 2 3

0 3

0

26 0 0

0 1

0

0 1

. . Table 2: Recommendations, Expulsions, and Suspended Expplsions-

Number of Students

Number of students for whom an expulsion was recommended 184 173 Number of students who were ordered expelled (wlietl~er or not the order was suspended) 232 206 Number of students who were mandatorily expelled (489 15 (c)(l), 48915(c)(2), 48915(c)(3),

-

48915(cX4) or 48900 (n)) 5 i 5 Number of students expelled whose orders of expulsion were subsequently suspended 42 1 27

Table 3: Types of Educational Referrals Made During Periods of Expulsion

Educational Placerncnt:

Elementary scllool in tlus district Elementary school in other district Junior IligI~, middle, or interniediate scIlool in this disrrict Junior high, middle, or intermediate scl~ool in other district High school in this district High scIlool in other district Continuation class or school in Ulis district Continuation class or scl~ool in other district

Expulsions Not Suspended

- I

6

I Dropped out ! 1 I I I

Suspended Expulsions Number of Exputsions that Ended Prior to July 1,2000

3

3

12

4

District Community Day Scl~ool in tlris district District Community Day School $ other district Adult education in tlis district Independent study in this district County-operated Community Day School County-operated Community School County court school Graduated Left districtlmoved

( Placement unknowi~ 1 1 I I I

Number of Expulsions that Ended Prior to

Number of Students Still Expelled as of July 1,2000

Opportunity class or school in this district I Opportunity class or scl~ool in other district

5

19

I

Number of Students Still Expelled as of July 1,2000

4

2

I

* ~ h k number 1v2i be highher than the total nurnbcr ojstudents placed if some studen

12 - c Next Page

July 1,2000 I

Otl~er placements - please specify Total Number of Students Pli~ced

, Total Number of Placements*

173 I 27

2 2

I I 27 27

173 173

23 23