OPPAGA report

http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/monitor/r ... 6-37s.html

The Department of Corrections is responsible for over 192,000 offenders on various types of community supervision. Between February 2004 and December 2005, 1,842 offenders were arrested for committing serious crimes, such as murder, sexual offenses, robbery, child abuse, and aggravated stalking. The department found officer noncompliance in 243 (13%) of those cases, most commonly for failing to make required contacts with the offender.

Several deficiencies hinder the supervision of offenders in community corrections. Program resources are not directed at offenders who pose the highest risk. Administrative tasks hinder officers’ ability to supervise offenders, and offender transport creates problems for the department and local law enforcement.

Therefore, the Legislature should remove caseload standards from statutes and require the department to manage caseloads and provide supervision based on an offender’s level of risk. The department should monitor all offenders based on their risk to public safety, study options to improve technology, and assess options of transporting offenders who violate supervision to jail.

Ho many of your cases that are Min should not be in that class. I had a person on for Homicide and within 3 days the system down graded it to Min. I say it is your system, so Min it is.

According to the department’s November 2005 Monthly Status Report, probation caseload ratios are shown below.

Community Control 17.7:1 •
Sex Offender & Post Prison Release 27.9:1
Drug Offender Probation 45.3:1
Pretrial Intervention 129.4:1
Probation 63.7:1
How many mainstream officer you know carrying 64 cases.

[Diogenes]

OPAGGA and the subsequent posts show the need to return decision making to the officer. The officer handling the case knows ( or should know) more about the offender than anyone else -including the judge, the prosecutor, the defense attorney and the DC management and supervisors.

The officer should determine the risk class, need for drug testing, treatment requirements and other special conditions.

We know how to do the job gives us the tools and get out of the way.

that is what is wrong, when the Deltona issue occured, they said we no longer could use our brain, and training. The risk class currently in use will breed another Deltona. The department never lisen to OPPOGA before they will not start now.

if it does not let the officer determine overides. Needing supervisor permission is a joke.

OPPAGA or OPAGA or OPPOGA or whatever...

All they are is a bunch of overpaid bean counters who haven't the foggiest about what this job is all about.

The sad part is that there are people who are stupid enough to listen to OPA, OPPA OPO - what the hell. You know what I'm talking about.

:roll:

[Diogenes]

Not too far wrong we HAVE to do a better job letting the people who control the purse strings what we do and what we need to do it right.

[mystikwarrior]

require the department to manage caseloads and provide supervision based on an offender’s level of risk

Exactly. But use a valid method to assign risk based on verifiable data regarding propensity to reoffend. That's what it's about, isn't it? Not so much what the actual crime was, but whether or not offenders convicted of particular crimes are prone to commit another crime.

How many of your cases that are Min should not be in that class.

Probably as many as there are High that shouldn't be. For that matter look at sex offenders. They're a higher risk than High and yet they have an extremely low reoffense rate. Far, far lower than all those burglary-unoccupied structure cases that are Minimum.

The officer handling the case knows ( or should know) more about the offender than anyone else

In the long haul this is true. But that case that just walked in your door after being sentenced this morning, what do you know about him? In the beginning you know nothing at all about him. The judge and prosecutor know far more about him and his offense than you do because they read and heard all the evidence. All you have is a name and a statute number. If you're lucky you have a PSI, but it isn't much good if you didn't do it yourself.

The officer should determine the risk class, need for drug testing, treatment requirements and other special conditions.

Absolutely not. You are not God.
Risk class can be determined by empirical data early on. As time progresses the PO can provide input as to whether the risk level should go up or down, but the decision needs to be a consensus opinion involving more people.
Drug testing is only needed if it has been shown the offender has a habit or the PO has a reason to believe the offender may be using.
Therapy requirements are best left to the professionals. Unless you have a PhD in Psychology you don't need to be involved.
Special conditions are imposed by the judge. If you want one imposed, take it to the judge and prove your case.
What you advocate grants the PO entirely too much power. Power that will be abused whether you're willing to admit it or not.