Report 2021-113 All Recommendation Responses

Report 2021-113: Batterer Intervention Programs: State Guidance and Oversight Are Needed to Effectively Reduce Domestic Violence (Release Date: October 2022)

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that courts have vital information when sentencing offender, the Legislature should require probation departments to assess all domestic violence offenders, rather than just those who are placed on formal probation, and to do so before the court sentences the offenders. In addition to the current requirements in state law, the initial assessments should determine an offender's sexual orientation, gender identity, and financial means to facilitate providing the offender with appropriate rehabilitative programs and services.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require the probation department, when investigating the appropriate batterer's program for a defendant placed on formal probation, to also take into account the defendant's sexual orientation, gender identity, and financial means and to promptly notify each program in which the defendant is required to participate the defendant's other required, court-mandated programs and probation violations pertaining to a domestic violence offense. However, this bill does not require assessments of all individuals upon sentencing, including those who are not placed on formal probation, and therefore would only include a partial implementation of this recommendation. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that all program providers and probation departments require offenders to attend programs consistently, the Legislature should define unexcused absences and provide direction as to whether unexcused absences are allowed and whether offenders must make up missed classes.

Description of Legislative Action

As of April 14, 2023, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that all courts and program providers use a consistent approach to fee waivers and fee scales, the Legislature should define indigence and ability to pay as they pertain to California Penal Code section 1203.097. It should also expressly prohibit probation departments and program providers from authorizing fee waivers.

Description of Legislative Action

As of April 14, 2023, the Legislature has not taken action to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: No Action Taken

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that offenders have sufficient information when choosing a program provider, the Legislature should require program providers to publicly post a comprehensive description of their sliding fee scales, and it should require the courts to provide each offender with a selection of available program providers, including their standard fees and sliding fee scales, before the offender agrees to the conditions of probation. Further, the Legislature should require the courts to inform offenders of the availability of fee waivers for those who may not have the ability to pay for the program.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require program providers to publicly post, including on an internet website, a comprehensive description of their sliding fee scales. The bill would require the court to inform the defendant of the availability of a program fee waiver, if they do not have the ability to pay for the program, and to provide each defendant with a selection of available program providers and those providers' standard fees and sliding fee scales upon the defendant's request. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments and providers provide to the courts timely notification about offenders' program and probation violations, the Legislature should require immediate reporting of all program and probation violations. Further, the Legislature should define immediate as within a specified number of business days, such as two business days, after an entity learns of a violation.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require program providers to report any violation of the terms of a protective order, including any new acts of violence or failure to comply with program requirements, to the court, prosecutor, and probation department within seven business days. However, this bill does not require the immediate reporting of other probation or program violations, and therefore would only include a partial implementation of this recommendation. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments, courts, and program providers comply with state law, the Legislature should designate Justice as responsible for the oversight of the batterer intervention system, including approving, monitoring, and renewing all program providers.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require, among other things, the Department of Justice, beginning on April 1, 2024, to oversee the probation departments and program providers to ensure compliance with state law, including but not limited to, approving, monitoring, and renewing approvals of program providers. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments, courts, and program providers comply with state law, the Legislature should designate Justice as responsible for the oversight of the batterer intervention system, including conducting periodic audits of probation departments and program providers.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require, among other things, the Department of Justice, beginning on April 1, 2024, to oversee the probation departments and program providers to ensure compliance with state law, including but not limited to, conducting periodic audits of probation departments and program providers. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments, courts, and program providers comply with state law, the Legislature should designate Justice as responsible for the oversight of the batterer intervention system, including establishing statewide comprehensive standards through regulations, with facilitators' educational requirements and a 52-week curriculum.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require the Department of Justice, beginning on April 1, 2024, to oversee the probation departments and program providers to ensure compliance with state law, including but not limited to: developing comprehensive, statewide standards through regulations, that include, but not limited to program provider curricula and training for social workers, counselors, probation departments, peace officers, and others involved in the enforcement of domestic violence crimes or the monitoring or rehabilitation of individuals convicted of domestic violence crimes in all aspects of domestic violence. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments, courts, and program providers comply with state law, the Legislature should designate Justice as responsible for the oversight of the batterer intervention system, including identifying or developing a comprehensive offender assessment tool.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require the Department of Justice, beginning on April 1, 2024, to oversee the probation departments and program providers to ensure compliance with state law, including but not limited to, identifying and developing a comprehensive final assessment tool to assess whether a defendant has satisfactorily completed the requirements of a program. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments, courts, and program providers comply with state law, the Legislature should designate Justice as responsible for the oversight of the batterer intervention system, including collaborating with the Judicial Council and relevant stakeholders, such as law enforcement representatives, mental health professionals, rehabilitative experts, victims' advocates, and district attorneys, to set standards for programs.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require the Department of Justice, beginning on April 1, 2024, to oversee the probation departments and program providers to ensure compliance with state law, including but not limited to collaborating with the Judicial Council and relevant stakeholders to set program provider standards. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation for Legislative Action

To ensure that probation departments, courts, and program providers comply with state law, the Legislature should designate Justice as responsible for the oversight of the batterer intervention system, including tracking relevant offender and program data to analyze program effectiveness.

Description of Legislative Action

AB 304 (Holden, 2023) would require the Department of Justice, beginning on April 1, 2024, to oversee the probation departments and program providers to ensure compliance with state law, and to analyze the effectiveness of programs, including, but not limited to, thorough the tracking of relevant offender and program data. As of April 14, 2023, this bill is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Legislation Introduced

Description of Legislative Action

The Legislature did not take action during the 2021-2022 Legislative Session to address this specific recommendation.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Recommendation #12 To: Alameda County Probation Department

To ensure that offenders are held accountable for complying with the conditions of their probation, Alameda Probation should, by April 2023, formalize and implement comprehensive policies and procedures for domestic violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law.

1-Year Agency Response

On October 11, 2023, the Chief Probation Officer/ Department issued a Notice of Change to all staff. The Notice of Change announced a new Policy was added on October 11, 2023, Section 111, Domestic Violence Supervision, to the Adult Field Services Manual. The Notice of Change and Policy 111 will be emailed.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

60-Day Agency Response

DV Policy was started in 2018. Policy was completed on June 2020, and has been being negotiated since that time.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

DV Policy was started in 2018. Policy was completed on June 2020, and has been being negotiated since that time.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Recommendation #13 To: Alameda County Probation Department

To ensure program compliance with state law, Alameda Probation should, by April 2023, formalize comprehensive program standards for program providers that present clear guidance on the department's expectations and the documentation it will review to verify compliance with state law. The probation department should distribute these standards to program providers during their initial application and approval process and again annually during the renewal process.

1-Year Agency Response

Current standards are in need of updating. Current standards have been found to be lacking and incomplete. A workgroup will be formed to update the standards.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The Department is updating its guidance on expectations for program providers and upon completion they will be distributed to the providers.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

The Department is updating its guidance on expectations for program providers and upon completion they will be distributed to the providers.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Recommendation #14 To: Alameda County Probation Department

To ensure that program providers comply with probation departments' standards and state law, Alameda Probation should develop and follow formalized policies and procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting comprehensive ongoing monitoring of program providers by April 2023. These policies should specify the frequency of monitoring, the documentation the department will require of program providers to demonstrate compliance, and the specific actions the department will take when a provider is noncompliant.

1-Year Agency Response

The draft policy for certification of batterer's intervention programs is in the final stages of review internally. Once internally approved this policy will need to be reviewed by County Counsel and County Labor. This Policy will need to be negotiated with impacted Unions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The draft policy for certification of batterer's intervention programs is in the final stages of review internally. Once internally approved this policy will need to be reviewed by County Counsel and County Labor. This Policy will need to be negotiated with impacted Unions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

The draft policy for certification of batterer's intervention programs is in the final stages of review internally. Once internally approved this policy will need to be reviewed by County Counsel and County Labor. This Policy will need to be negotiated with impacted Unions.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Recommendation #15 To: Alameda County Probation Department

To comply with state law, Alameda Probation should immediately implement record retention policies to maintain documentation on all offenders for five years after the offenders complete or are terminated from probation.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department has a process in place and addressing the gaps identified to accurately document non compliance. Additionally, the Department is determining if non compliance was a result of the lack of a Domestic Violence Policy, and the lack of comprehensive program standards which appear to have resulted in certain records / documents never being submitted and/or collected to be retained.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The Department has a process in place and addressing the gaps identified to accurately document non compliance.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

The Department has a process in place and addressing the gaps identified to accurately document non compliance.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Recommendation #16 To: Alameda County Probation Department

To ensure that the courts can provide an offender with a selection of available program providers and their costs before the offender agrees to attend a program as a condition of probation, Alameda Probation should maintain standard program fee information and sliding fee scales for each of the providers it oversees, and make this information available to the courts by April 2023.

1-Year Agency Response

The Department compiled a spreadsheet of BIP providers which includes standard program fee information and sliding fee scales for each of the providers it oversees. This information was emailed to the Courts on October 16, 2023. The email was sent to the Presiding Judge, other Court staff, Public Defender and District Attorney. The email and spreadsheet will be emailed separately.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

Although Alameda Probation provided the court with a list of program providers and a range of fees, we found that the list only contains a high-level range of fees, which does not provide enough detail for an offender to identify their cost per session based on their income. Additionally, for one of its providers, it only lists one fee per session, indicating that the provider does not have a sliding fee scale. Until Alameda Probation demonstrates that it maintains sliding fee scales for each of its providers and it makes those fee scales available to the courts, we will continue to report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

60-Day Agency Response

The Department is compiling a spreadsheet of providers, meeting times/days, and fees to share with the Courts.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

6-Month Agency Response

The Department is compiling a spreadsheet of providers, meeting times/days, and fees to share with the Courts.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Recommendation #17 To: Contra Costa County Probation Department

To ensure that offenders are held accountable for complying with the conditions of their probation, Contra Costa Probation should, by April 2023, formalize and implement comprehensive policies and procedures for domestic violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law.

1-Year Agency Response

Contra Costa Probation created a Domestic Violence policy which was approved on April 1, 2023. That policy has since been amended and was updated in September 2023 to describe the Department's expectations more clearly for staff's compliance with state law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

As indicated in the December 2022 response, Contra Costa Probation created a committee, hereinafter referred to as The Committee, in November of 2022 to review the Domestic Violence (DV) supervision policies of other counties in California. Since the last reporting, The Committee submitted a draft of the proposed DV policy to Probation Administration. The DV policy was approved and implemented on 4/13/2023.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

We disagree with Contra Costa Probation's assertion that it has formalized and implemented comprehensive policies and procedures for domestic violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law. The domestic violence case management policy that Contra Costa Probation submitted for our review is less than three pages and does not comprehensively address key concerns we raised in our audit, such as the time frame in which probation officers must report probation violations to the court, that probation officers must conduct an initial assessment of all individuals placed on formal probation, as state law requires, and that probation officers do not have the authority to determine whether to excuse offenders' absences, as state law places this responsibility solely on the program providers. Until it develops and implements such comprehensive policies and procedures, we will continue to report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

60-Day Agency Response

Contra Costa Probation created a committee, hereinafter referred to as The Committee, in November of 2022 to review the Domestic Violence (DV) supervision policies of other counties in California. The chairperson of The Committee is Deputy Probation Officer Andrew Scroggy, Contra Costa Probation's Batter's Intervention Program (BIP) Certification Officer. We are diligently working on tailoring a Domestic Violence Offender Supervision policy that will best suit the needs of Contra Costa as well as ensure our compliance with state law. The first draft of this policy will be submitted in mid to late January 2023 to Probation Supervisor Lori Militar, supervisor of the Domestic Violence Unit, who will be responsible for implementation. It is the hope that this policy can be approved and implemented by April of 2023 or soon thereafter.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #18 To: Contra Costa County Probation Department

To ensure program compliance with state law, Contra Costa Probation should, by April 2023, formalize comprehensive program standards for program providers that present clear guidance on the department's expectations and the documentation it will review to verify compliance with state law. The probation department should distribute these standards to program providers during their initial application and approval process and again annually during the renewal process.

1-Year Agency Response

The Committee submitted a proposed procedure outlining the duties and responsibilities of the BIP Certification Officer on March 6, 2023. This procedure will serve to enhance our current standards and practices to better inform BIP providers of both their legal requirements and our expectations. This procedure was approved as of 9/29/2023 and is currently in effect.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Contra Costa Probation has not demonstrated that it fully implemented this recommendation. In our review of its certification process, which includes the elements of program standards, we found that Contra Costa Probation did not specify the documentation that it will review to verify a program's compliance with state law. It also did not provide evidence that it provided its certification process or standards to program providers during its initial application and approval process or annually during the renewal process. We look forward to reviewing Contra Costa Probation's progress in implementing this recommendation during its next annual response.

6-Month Agency Response

The Committee submitted a proposed protocol outlining the duties and responsibilities of the BIP Certification Officer on March 6, 2023. This protocol will serve to enhance our current standards and practices to better inform BIP providers of both their legal requirements and our expectations.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

Contra Costa Probation is working on a protocol that will outline the duties and responsibilities of the BIP Certification Officer. This will include enhancing our current standards and practices to better inform BIP providers of both their legal requirements and our expectations. This protocol is being drafted by The Committee and is on the same timetable for initial draft submission and well as implementation as Recommendation 1.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #19 To: Contra Costa County Probation Department

To ensure that program providers comply with the probation department's standards and state law, Contra Costa Probation should develop and follow formalized policies and procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting comprehensive ongoing monitoring of program providers by April 2023. These policies should specify the frequency of monitoring, the documentation the department will require of program providers to demonstrate compliance, and the specific actions the department will take when a provider is noncompliant.

1-Year Agency Response

A proposed procedure outlining the duties and responsibilities of the BIP Certification Officer was submitted on March 6, 2023. This procedure will serve to enhance our current standards and practices to better inform BIP providers of both their legal requirements and our expectations. The procedure was approved by Probation Administration and is currently in effect. Also as previously reported, Contra Costa Probation restructured the duties and responsibilities of the Certification Officer in December of 2022. This designated person is to focus solely on the implementation of the recommendations.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Contra Costa Probation has not demonstrated that it fully implemented our recommendation. In our review of its program certification process, we found that the process is not comprehensive in that it does not specify the documentation that it expects department staff review to verify a program's compliance with state law and Contra Costa Probation's program standards or what it should evaluate while observing a counseling session. We look forward to reviewing Contra Costa Probation's progress in implementing this recommendation during its next annual response.

6-Month Agency Response

As previously reported, Contra Costa Probation restructured the duties and responsibilities of the Certification Officer in December of 2022. This was done so that this designated person can focus solely on the implementation of the recommendations and implementation of the newly proposed DV policy and BIP Certification protocol.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

In December of 2022, Contra Costa Probation restructured the duties and responsibilities of the Certification Officer. This was done so that this designated person can focus solely on the implementation of the recommendations. The Committee is reviewing our current practice and procedure and will submit their recommended revisions in January of 2023 with a planned implementation timeframe of April 2023 or soon thereafter.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #20 To: Contra Costa County Probation Department

To comply with state law, Contra Costa Probation should immediately implement record retention policies to maintain documentation on all offenders for five years after the offenders complete or are terminated from probation.

6-Month Agency Response

As previously stated, Contra Costa Probation has updated our record retention policies in accordance with this recommendation. We began implementation of this policy on December 22, 2022.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Fully Implemented

60-Day Agency Response

As stated in our initial response to the California State Audit of Batterer Intervention Program, we have updated our record retention policies in accordance with this recommendation. This policy is under review and will be implemented upon approval.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #21 To: Contra Costa County Probation Department

To ensure that the courts can provide an offender with a selection of available program providers and their costs before the offender agrees to attend a program as a condition of probation, Contra Costa Probation should maintain standard program fee information and sliding fee scales for each of the providers it oversees, and make this information available to the courts by April 2023.

1-Year Agency Response

Below is a hyperlink with a list of all program providers that Contra Costa Probation overseas. Outlined in this list are the services provided and sliding fee information. This hyperlink is accessible to the public on the Contra Costa County website. This was last updated on May 31, 2023.

https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78966/CCC-BIP-Provider-Roster-Updated-On-53123?bidId=

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

Although Contra Costa Probation maintains a list of program providers and a range of fees, we found that the list only contains a high-level range of fees, which does not provide enough detail for an offender to identify their cost per session based on their income. Additionally, for one of its providers, it only lists one fee per session, indicating that the provider does not have a sliding fee scale as state law requires. Until Contra Costa Probation demonstrates that it maintains sliding fee scales for each of its providers and it makes those fee scales available to the courts, we will not continue to report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

6-Month Agency Response

As previously reported, on November 17, 2022, Contra Costa Probation held a BIP provider's meeting and advised each provider who has not already done so to submit their sliding scale by their next annual recertification deadline. Timeframes vary depending on the provider's annual anniversary date.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

On November 17, 2022, Contra Costa Probation held a BIP provider's meeting and advised each provider who has not already done so to submit their sliding scale by their next annual recertification deadline. Timeframes vary depending on the provider's annual anniversary date.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #22 To: Del Norte County Probation Department

To ensure that offenders are held accountable for complying with the conditions of their probation, Del Norte Probation should, by April 2023, formalize and implement comprehensive policies and procedures for domestic violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law.

Recommendation #23 To: Del Norte County Probation Department

To ensure program compliance with state law, Del Norte Probation should, by April 2023, formalize comprehensive program standards for program providers that present clear guidance on the department's expectations and the documentation it will review to verify compliance with state law. The probation department should distribute these standards to program providers during their initial application and approval process and again annually during the renewal process.

Recommendation #24 To: Del Norte County Probation Department

To ensure that program providers comply with the probation department's standards and state law, Del Norte Probation should develop and follow formalized policies and procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting comprehensive ongoing monitoring of program providers by April 2023. These policies should specify the frequency of monitoring, the documentation the department will require of program providers to demonstrate compliance, and the specific actions the department will take when a provider is noncompliant.

Recommendation #25 To: Del Norte County Probation Department

To ensure that the courts can provide an offender with a selection of available program providers and their costs before the offender agrees to attend a program as a condition of probation, Del Norte Probation should maintain standard program fee information and sliding fee scales for each of the providers it oversees, and make this information available to the courts by April 2023.

Recommendation #26 To: Los Angeles County Probation Department

To ensure that offenders are held accountable for complying with the conditions of their probation, Los Angeles Probation should, by April 2023, formalize and implement comprehensive policies and procedures for domestic violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law.

1-Year Agency Response

In April 2023, the Los Angeles County Probation Department published formalized Domestic Violence policies and procedures (Directives 1491, 1492, and 1494) for caseload management. The policies clearly describe the department's expectations from probation staff, in compliance with state law.

After recent review of our policies, we recognized some inconsistencies in the language therefore, we will need to amend or current policies.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Los Angeles Probation has made significant progress toward implementing our recommendation. During our review of its policies, procedures, and program standards, we found inconsistencies regarding whether it allows offenders to have unexcused absences from the program. However, state law does not allow for unexcused absences. In speaking with Los Angeles Probation about our specific concerns, it recognized the need to revise portions of its policies and standards to ensure that probation officers and programs comply with state law. We look forward to reviewing Los Angeles Probation's progress toward implementing this recommendation during its next response.

Recommendation #27 To: Los Angeles County Probation Department

To ensure program compliance with state law, Los Angeles Probation should, by April 2023, formalize comprehensive program standards for program providers that present clear guidance on the department's expectations and the documentation it will review to verify compliance with state law. The probation department should distribute these standards to program providers during their initial application and approval process and again annually during the renewal process.

1-Year Agency Response

In April 2023, the Los Angeles County Probation Department implemented formal program standards for the providers. The standards contain clear guidance on the department's expectations and documentation it will review to verify compliance with state law. Additionally, the probation department re-distributed these standards to the program providers via email and US mail, as a part of the application and approval process.

After recent review of our Programs Standards, we recognized some inconsistencies in the language therefore, we will need to amend or current Program Standards.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Los Angeles Probation has made significant progress toward implementing our recommendation. During our review of its policies, procedures, and program standards, we found inconsistencies regarding whether it allows offenders to have unexcused absences from the program. However, state law does not allow for unexcused absences. In speaking with Los Angeles Probation about our specific concerns, it recognized the need to revise portions of its policies and standards to ensure that probation officers and programs comply with state law. We look forward to reviewing Los Angeles Probation's progress toward implementing this recommendation during its next response.

Recommendation #28 To: Los Angeles County Probation Department

To ensure that program providers comply with the probation department's standards and state law, Los Angeles Probation should develop and follow formalized policies and procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting comprehensive ongoing monitoring of program providers by April 2023. These policies should specify the frequency of monitoring, the documentation the department will require of program providers to demonstrate compliance, and the specific actions the department will take when a provider is noncompliant.

1-Year Agency Response

In April 2023, the Los Angeles County Probation Department implemented the formal policy and procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting ongoing monitoring of program providers. (See attachment, pages 35-37, Application by Program). The policy specifies the frequency of monitoring, documentation the department will require the program providers to demonstrate compliance, (See attachment, pages 14-16, Record Keeping) and the specific actions the department will take when a provider is noncompliant. (See attachment, page 41, Plan of Correction)

After recent review of our Program Standards, we recognized some inconsistencies in the language therefore, we will need to amend or current Program Standards.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Los Angeles Probation has made significant progress toward implementing our recommendation. During our review of its policies, procedures, and program standards, we found inconsistencies regarding whether it allows offenders to have unexcused absences from the program. However, state law does not allow for unexcused absences. In speaking with Los Angeles Probation about our specific concerns, it recognized the need to revise portions of its policies and standards to ensure that probation officers and programs comply with state law. We look forward to reviewing Los Angeles Probation's progress toward implementing this recommendation during its next response.

Recommendation #29 To: Los Angeles County Probation Department

To ensure that the courts can provide an offender with a selection of available program providers and their costs before the offender agrees to attend a program as a condition of probation, Los Angeles Probation should maintain standard program fee information and sliding fee scales for each of the providers it oversees, and make this information available to the courts by April 2023.

1-Year Agency Response

In April 2023, The Los Angeles County Probation Department met with and provided the courts with an updated approved Batterer's Intervention Program list. The list included available program providers, their program fee range, and a sliding scale indicator. The courts uploaded the approved list onto the Court's public website.

However, the Los Angeles County Probation Department has nearly one hundred and forty Providers. During our recent annual application process, we have collected the required data and fee scales for each program. We will compile all fee scales into one document to be presented the courts, to be placed on their public website.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Pending

Recommendation #30 To: San Joaquin County Probation Department

To ensure that offenders are held accountable for complying with the conditions of their probation, San Joaquin Probation should, by April 2023, formalize and implement comprehensive policies and procedures for domestic violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law.

6-Month Agency Response

The department is continuing to update its policies and procedures for domestice violence case management that clearly describe the department's expectations for probation staff's compliance with state law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The San Joaquin County Probation Department has policies and procedures that are comprehensive and are currently being updated to clearly describe the department's expectation for probation staff. Accountability is currently being met through staff meetings, DV providers meetings, case audits of clients and training with staff.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

We look forward to reviewing San Joaquin Probation's updated policies and procedures for domestic violence case management and its staff's compliance with state law during future responses.

Recommendation #31 To: San Joaquin County Probation Department

To ensure program compliance with state law, San Joaquin Probation should, by April 2023, formalize comprehensive program standards for program providers that present clear guidance on the department's expectations and the documentation it will review to verify compliance with state law. The probation department should distribute these standards to program providers during their initial application and approval process and again annually during the renewal process.

1-Year Agency Response

The Probation Department has finalized comprehensive program standards for program providers and distributed to the program providers utilized in the County.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

The department has updated the standards for clients programs and certifications.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

We disagree with San Joaquin Probation's assertion that it has fully implemented our recommendation. Although it appears that San Joaquin has made progress toward formalizing comprehensive program standards, the program standards it provided remain in draft form. Additionally, San Joaquin did not provide documentation to support that it has distributed formalized standards to its program providers during the initial application or annual renewal processes. Until it addresses these shortcomings, we will continue to report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

60-Day Agency Response

The San Joaquin County Probation Department is currently developing a detailed, comprehensive policy for certifying, approving, renewing and monitoring of program providers.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #32 To: San Joaquin County Probation Department

To ensure that program providers comply with the probation department's standards and state law, San Joaquin Probation should develop and follow formalized policies and procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting comprehensive ongoing monitoring of program providers by April 2023. These policies should specify the frequency of monitoring, the documentation the department will require of program providers to demonstrate compliance, and the specific actions the department will take when a provider is noncompliant.

6-Month Agency Response

The department has updated standards for client programs and certificatiions for renewing and conducting comprehensive ongoing monitoring of program providers.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

We do not agree with San Joaquin's assertion that it has fully implemented comprehensive procedures for approving, renewing, and conducting ongoing monitoring of program providers. Specifically, the policies San Joaquin provided to support its assertion are from 2019, which was before this audit and its related findings. To comply, we would expect San Joaquin to revise its policies and procedures to provide its staff guidance on items such as the frequency of ongoing monitoring, a method to ensure that providers report program violations, including, but not limited to, excessive or unexcused absences , and a method to review program's fee schedules and ensure that providers follow those schedules in compliance with state law. Until it does so, we will continue to report this recommendation as not fully implemented.

60-Day Agency Response

The San Joaquin County Probation Department is currently developing a detailed, comprehensive polices for certifying, approving, renewing and monitoring of program providers

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #33 To: San Joaquin County Probation Department

To comply with state law, San Joaquin Probation should immediately follow its record retention policies to maintain documentation on all offenders for five years after the offenders complete or are terminated from probation.

60-Day Agency Response

Per state law, the San Joaquin County Probation Department currently has a record retention policy in place. The policy went live for staff acknowledgement in June 0f 2022.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented

As we recognized in the audit report, San Joaquin Probation's record retention policy is sufficient if it is followed. We look forward to the department demonstrating that its staff are following the policy during its future responses.

Recommendation #34 To: San Joaquin County Probation Department

To ensure that the courts can provide an offender with a selection of available program providers and their costs before the offender agrees to attend a program as a condition of probation, San Joaquin Probation should maintain standard program fee information and sliding fee scales for each of the providers it oversees, and make this information available to the courts by April 2023.

6-Month Agency Response

The department continues to develop a brochure for the Court regarding domestic violence program requirements.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

The San Joaquin County Probation Department is currently developing a flyer/brochure which will have provider information and thier costs. This information will be made available to the courts when completed.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

Recommendation #35 To: Judicial Council of California

To ensure that the courts consistently apply consequences to offenders for probation violations, the Judicial Council should establish guidance and provide training to judges regarding the application of the batterer intervention law by April 2023.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From September 2023

To raise immediate branch-wide awareness of the State Auditor's findings and conclusions, the Judicial Council disseminated copies of the audit report to all presiding judges and court executive officers of the superior courts.

As the auditor's report noted, judges have the discretion to determine when it is appropriate to impose escalating consequences on offenders for repeated probation violations. The audit report also acknowledged that judges ultimately sentenced to jail or prison more than half of the offenders who did not comply with their probation conditions.

The Judicial Council redesigned curriculum for some judicial officer courses to include additional content on domestic violence probation supervision. For example, the Criminal Law Primary Assignment Orientation course, which is required for all new judges in a criminal assignment, now includes additional information about probation compliance. Similarly, the curriculum for the Judicial Council's next Domestic Violence Institute in May 2024 is being redesigned to include enhanced Batterer Intervention Program (BIP) content and ensuring probation compliance.

Additionally, the Judicial Council has developed and delivered new judicial education programs and products related to domestic violence and domestic violence probation supervision. Specifically, in April 2023, the Judicial Council offered two live webinars focused on promoting compliance in domestic violence cases. Those webinars were recorded and are posted for viewing at any time on the council's internal site for judicial education. The Judicial Council also created a BIP bench card that is available online and included in course materials for judicial officers sitting in a criminal law assignment. Lastly, future webinars are planned to address BIP data, research, and best practices for achieving positive outcomes and reducing recidivism.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

6-Month Agency Response

To raise immediate branch wide awareness of the State Auditor's findings and conclusions, the Judicial Council disseminated copies of the audit report and accompanying fact sheet to all presiding judges and court executive officers of the superior courts. Further, the Judicial Council's Advisory Committee on Audits and Financial Accountability for the Judicial Branch reviewed the report's findings and conclusions during its public meeting on November 8th.

As noted in the auditor's report, judges have the discretion to determine when it is appropriate to impose escalating consequences on offenders for repeated probation violations. The audit report also acknowledged that judges ultimately sentenced to jail or prison more than half of the offenders who did not comply with their probation conditions. Judicial officers consider a myriad of case-specific factors when adjudicating matters involving domestic violence and may consult the Judicial Council's Domestic Violence Benchbook—as referenced in the audit report—when responding to probation violations.

Starting in January 2023, attorneys working in the Center for Judicial Education and Research will review opportunities to add the audit report's content to the council's domestic violence training programs. The Domestic Violence Institute referenced in the report will not convene again until the Spring of 2024; nevertheless, council staff are currently discussing how best to incorporate the audit's findings into the planning and agenda for this event. We anticipate having more information to share during our subsequent updates.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

60-Day Agency Response

To raise immediate branch wide awareness of the State Auditor's findings and conclusions, the Judicial Council disseminated copies of the audit report and accompanying fact sheet to all presiding judges and court executive officers of the superior courts. Further, the Judicial Council's Advisory Committee on Audits and Financial Accountability for the Judicial Branch reviewed the report's findings and conclusions during its public meeting on November 8th.

As noted in the auditor's report, judges have the discretion to determine when it is appropriate to impose escalating consequences on offenders for repeated probation violations. The audit report also acknowledged that judges ultimately sentenced to jail or prison more than half of the offenders who did not comply with their probation conditions. Judicial officers consider a myriad of case-specific factors when adjudicating matters involving domestic violence and may consult the Judicial Council's Domestic Violence Benchbook—as referenced in the audit report—when responding to probation violations.

Starting in January 2023, attorneys working in the Center for Judicial Education and Research will review opportunities to add the audit report's content to the council's domestic violence training programs. The Domestic Violence Institute referenced in the report will not convene again until the Spring of 2024; nevertheless, council staff are currently discussing how best to incorporate the audit's findings into the planning and agenda for this event. We anticipate having more information to share during our subsequent updates.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

All Recommendations in 2021-113

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.