Population is right at 6,300 clients. The number of clients we currently have on electronic monitoring is 51. Youll see its less than 1 of our total client population being monitored on electronic monitoring. The average time on electronic monitoring is approximately 180 days. We also looked at the number of our clients on electronic monitoring who are unhoused and thats right at 11 . Then quite honestly our program is very effective in terms of keeping people out of custody. We have a 20 noncompliance rate overall for those individuals placed on electronic monitoring. If you look at the pie chart below, its our age range, so clearly our largest population on electronic monitoring are the 18 to 25yearolds, followed 26yearolds. And our mean age is 36 years old. Clients by gender, clearly which is consistent with what the Sheriffs Office reported. We have 88 of our total clients on electronic monitoring are male. Broken down by race and ethnicity, 53 are african americ american, with our second highest population being latinx at 29 . Next slide please. Its also important to consider the crime type when were having these discussions. 45 are individuals with an underlying offense that is violent against a person. So that includes assaults with a deadly weapon, domestic violence, manslaughter, arson against a person, robbery of a person, and false imprisonment. Our next highest population has to do with firearms. The majority of those are felon in possession of a firearm followed by our property crimes, which are typically burglaries, both first degree and second degree, our sex offender, d. U. I. S, and drug offenses. Our drug offenses are typically for those possession for sale and usually a large amount of drugs. It is important to recognize that out of that population of 51 on electronic monitoring, 47 of them are individuals convicted of felonies and 4 are misdemeanors. When were looking at the risk level, we administer a risk and needs assessment. 73 of the individuals that are on electronic monitoring are deemed high in terms of a supervision level for monitoring purposes. The high risk clients and the clients we serve in probation are a challenging population. Because of the expensive training of my staff as peace officers and their experience, the longterm relationships that we have over the period of time that somebody is on probation and the linkages to services that we require while somebody is being monitored on electronic monitoring puts us in a place that were well suited to operate this program. We definitely used it as a graduated sanction. With that 20 of noncompliance, it really demonstrates that b m beam people are successful and it lends itself towards reducing that overreliance on custody. Next slide please. As with any program there are rules that are outlined for every participant. Clearly some of the obvious ones obey all laws, comply with the directives of probation staff on electronic monitoring, notifying us of any arrests, citation, or Police Contact within 24 hours, and any change in address or contact information, submit to search as appropriate. This is specifically important when it comes to firearms charges, as well as sex offenders. Possession of weapons or illegal drugs, tampering the electronic monitoring advice, keeping it charged and report any problems with the equipment and probably the most Important Program rule is to attend counselling and programing directed by the court and or probation staff. Even during these times of covid, we have converted our programing to virtual programing, so we have a very strong reliance and connection with our housing programs and our providers for programs to make sure that individuals in general are participating in counselling and programing, but more specifically those individuals on electronic monitoring. And our final slide is about our electronic monitoring contract. In june 2019, an equipment Lease Agreement with electronic monitoring devices. So prior to 2019, adult probation obtained a work order with the Sheriffs Office who at that point had a contract with l. C. A. This created a challenge for probation because what was happening is we were going through a provider to get information about reports and incidents that were happening with individuals who were on the len tronnic Electronic Monitoring Program. We decided to go on our own to make sure it was efficient and effective. Thats why we engaged on a contract of our own. The average monthly cost with 7,322, which averaged 144 per client, per month. That has gone up a bit during covid to 11,442 as an average monthly cost, but that still equates with the number of clients we have on electronic monitoring to about 224 per client, per month. That equates to 7. 50 a day. Its the equipment lease and the oversight of our probation staff. So this is much less than custody costs associated with an individual that is being monitored and certainly by engaging in our own contract, we have reduced the cost by about 50 overall by bringing that in house. That concludes our presentation and im happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Any questions for chief fletcher . Yes supervisor walton. Thank you so much chair fewer and thank you for the presentation chief fletcher. I just had one question in terms of one of the guidelines, submit to search as appropriate. What is as appropriate . So if there is some reason to believe that someone may be possessing something that is illegal, we may engage in a search. Its not routine certainly, but if a victim calls and says they have a lot of drugs in the house or they have weapons in the house, then we are going to engage in a search for safety purposes. So its not a search at will type situation . If they have a search clause thats been ordered by the court, then certainly theyre subject to search and seizure at any time. While on the program, they sign rules saying we can search if appropriate. And im wondering, it almost sounds like this is a little bit of a discrepancy on what the sheriff practices because if im not mistaken, they have it set up where at any given time they can go to a residence of where a person resides and search them for no reason or any reason. Right uh im not sure what the rules of their program are. Ours are very clear. Were certainly not going to ov overreach and violate somebodys rights. Certainly if they have a court order while theyre on probation, that is subject to search and seizure, that gives us the right to do that at any time without cause. Thats certainly not how we have operated nor will we do that. Were only searching if there is a reason to do that. If were going into somebodys home, were doing a visual search around the room to make sure there is safety for everyone involved but were not routinely going in and doing a complete search of everybodys property. Thank you director fletcher. I will probably repeat this again, but i think it forces people to discriminate against folks who are on electronic monitori monitoring. Obviously if someone doesnt want their house searched at will, they wont let someone reside with them that is on an ankle monitor. We want to keep people safe and make sure that were not promoting discrimination by default. I appreciate you. Absolutely, thank you supervisor walton. Oftentimes our staff is having conversations with our clients who are residing with other people to make sure that they know that should there be a problem and should there be a search clause in place by the court that potentially they are subject to that search. Individuals they live with are informed, but there is the advantage for probation because we have that longterm relationship with somebody that we are working with, our individual clients. Our main goal is the stability of our clients. We dont want to go in and do something that is going to jeopardize their housing or their relationships with family memb members. Were constantly having those discussions, which is why i think its a unique spot for us and i think it is very effective to have probation supervising these folks in that way. Anymore questions or comments from my colleagues . I have a couple of questions. So only less than 1 of people that you are supervising are on electronic monitoring, is that correct . Thats correct. And out of the individuals on electronic individuals, what percentage of them are working . Do you know . I dont know that off the top of my head but we can get that information. Okay. Then the compliance for those 51 that are on electronic monitoring i mean its 51 is your average number or have you gone higher . Do you feel that this is pretty much common since you have been there . Since ive been with the city, yes. We have maintained a low number. I think we are very cautious to make sure that were effectively using electronic monitoring, so it is not something that just as a matter of default were using. Were really looking at all of the conditions to make sure that it is absolutely necessary. So that number actually is higher than usual because of covid and making sure that people are not unnecessarily going back into custody. So i think we have been as low as the mid30s and now its 51. So you are basically using electronic monitoring as a last resort when people are struggling or have challenges with being monitored in other ways, is that correct . Thats correct and statutorily were required for certain sex offenders. Correct. Okay so you feel as though the 51 or the less than 1 on electronic monitoring that its a useful tool when use in this way, sparingly and on specific, not just broad sweeping but more specific incidents as you examine each individual on the electronic monitoring is the way to go. Absolutely because evidence based practices shows you need to match the risk with the sanction. You dont want to oversuper vise people. You dont to layer on more conditions than absolutely necessary. So having it as a tool internally to be able to keep people out of custody and give them opportunities without taking them into custody has been great for us. Sure. So for those 51 on electronic monitoring, how would you say that being on electronic monitoring alters their ability to continue with relationships, with jobs, with those types of things. It doesnt. We allowed people out to programing, they were able to work or go to school prior to covid. All of those elements are worked into the program with the individual being supervised and the probation officer. We had a case where an individual lived out of county and had some medical issues and was going in and out of m. R. I. S. Our staff was meeting the person outside the medical providers office, take off the bracelet and have them go in and have them come back to the parking lot. We would place that man or ba back monitor back on them. We make sure were doing what we can to accommodate folks and that their lives are productive and beneficial and they feel supported in the community. So for those individuals, you mentioned that everyone that is out of oh no. Did you say it or did the juvenile chief say it must be her. Out of county has to be electronic monitored. That wasnt you. No. Okay, so instead of electronic monitoring [inaudible] do you find that the other type of monitoring is effective also . Are you finding that perhaps it is not as effective as you thought . Right, the only other monitoring were doing is monitoring by our probation officers in the community and that is effective. Regardless if theyre wearing a bracelet or not, that offers an added layer of protection. Our officers are well suited to support people in the community. The entire time theyre on probation, were making contact with them, were in the community with them, they come into the office as appropriate, and that links to services. That longterm relationship is the key. Our clients begin to trust our probation officers. What were trying to do with them in terms of rehabilitation is in their best interest and using electronic monitoring is one tool but our general monitoring in the community is also effective. So how long would you say your average client is on probation under your services . So prior to Assembly Bill 1950, which was just signed by the governor, it was a standard of three years on probation if somebody was doing really well, we would often take cases back to court and consider early termination. Certainly other factors contribute, if someone is on a revoke status and warrant has been issued, that extends the time theyre on probation. On average, three years. Okay. So, i wanted to ask one last question about your monitoring in the community and what that looks like and what the probation officers do they have relationships or conversations or contact with family membe members, friends, s at a church, or a Community Center . Can you tell us about that type of monitoring you do in the community. Absolutely. We base our supervision on the risk level that someone poses. I mention in the presentation that 73 of the individuals on electronic monitoring have come out from the assessment as a high supervision level. That means they are supervised or seen facetoface twice in the community or office every month. So our level of supervision depends on the risk they pose. Those contacts could be at a program. Those contacts could be at home, with their parents, their family member, friends, leaders in the community that are working with an individual. All of those collateral contacts happen with the probation officer and we go out in a way thats nonthreatening. They go out not marked as probation officers. Any equipment they have is concealed so theyre blending into the community to not embarrass the clients, to broadcast to a neighborhood that somebody is on probation, but it is amazing the relationships we have with not only the family members, who are sometimes the victims, and all the providers and other relationships that they have. We are in contact with all of those people. We do that at the front end when were making a recommendation to the court on what should happen to somebody at the time of sentencing and once we get them, were also doing that and building those relationships. And you have a different provider for electronic monitoring. Thats correct. Colleagues, do you recall whether or not the chief miller said they have a different contract in the provision . Chief miller, do you have the same provider as electronic monitoring as adult probation or a sheriff . I dont think so. We have scram, is that who you have . No, we have b. I. Okay, who does the sheriff have . We have sentinel. So you have three different providers, and youre using their services in different ways with a different approach. Then we have the Sheriffs Department also. So these different departments, three different companies, three different ways in which theyre utilized. Okay, i think this is getting interesting. I didnt know about this before. Thank you very much. Any questions from my colleagues . I find all of this fascinating. Lets go to our next speaker which is the Sheriffs Office. Kristin. Supervisor, my presentation for this part of the hearing was what i presented earlier. Sure. Now having spoken to juveniles and the adults, are there questions about the sheriffs contract seeing that, do you know why there are three different providers for the same service, within the same county and city of San Francisco . Well, as chief fletcher mentioned, we used to have a contract with adult probation, but adult probation thought it would be better for them to have their own separate contract, so we stopped doing that beginning a year and a half ago. Our contract is roughly unchanged from when we first started doing this some time ago. As there been a discussion between the three departments and also juvenile probation about electronic monitoring in general and the providers . Certainly, we used to interact with adult probation on this and you see the conversations listed here. Since they separated you guys. Did you have conversations about effectiveness and efficacy of the program itself . I believe the operational folks do have conversations back and forth, yes. I would imagine that the sheriff and the chief had conversations about this, yes. So when you set up the rules around the procedures, which is what were discussing today in item number 1, is that done through your department or does the company have any sort of say in electronic monitoring procedures or rules . The rule sheet we have, my understanding is that were just trying to make Crystal Clear to the defendant what the Court Ordered for that defendants release. A lot of this happens in the courtroom very quickly so before we put people into the program, we want to make sure they understand completely what the Court Requires of them. So you never require more than what the courts require. No maam. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any questions for mr. Holland at all . Chair fewer, just real quick. We have other presentations this morning, correct . Yes. I want to wait to hear from other presenters. Thats great. What about supervisor mandelman . I thought i would give mr. Holland the opportunity to respond to the question i asked chief miller about thinking of effectiveness and your can you share any early insider thoughts on how youre thinking of the effectiveness of electronic monitoring in mitigating those two risks that you identified on that chart of people not showing up or people engaging in, you know, problematic criminal activity. Were interested in taking a look at this. Were open to what the findings may be, but the findings that we have our understanding was summarized roughly in the presentation that i gave. We do take a look at the risks on the Decision Making framework. The information you presented doesnt really show whether electronic monitoring makes it more likely that someone shows up or electronic monitoring makes it less likely that they reoffend. Who are being let out, who are at risk for reoffending or not showing up, and we throw an electronic monitor on them and the intuition or theory that is making the situation safer or making it more likely that they will show up for their trial date. Well, if people do violate the terms of their release, they say its a sex offender who have been told dont go to this location and the monitor says they have gone to that location. We can then contact that person if theyre on electronic monitoring because we know that and we can work with them to get them out of the situation where they are reoffending or if i mean there is the risk, the thought of Risk Mitigation is not coming out of nowhere. This is why the courts are assigning people to electronic monitoring, opposed to certification management. A lot of times these two things go together. I guess there are a number of cases where Something Like that happens and someone is able to see who monitors the monitors . Thats the contract we have with sentinel. Se sentinel has a whole program and that program is run by sheriff deputies. Are they monitoring this person is not going to this persons address and the monitor just showed that . Yes, we would see that and we would work with that defendant to make sure they get out of the situation where they are not meeting the requirements of their court mandated e. M. Program. Really, you know, the first thing that we do is not go out and try to rearrest. We call people up and we work with their close contacts, one of the suggestions is that we formalize a program where we have contacts for these people. We already have informal programs that we work pretty aggressively. Were open to having discussions to formalize that program. I mean i wonder if it would be possible to get data that would show, you know, when you release someone thats evaluated as a Public Safety risk, but theyre still released. Their likelihood of reoffending is not showing up. You have that information, but you know, their likelihood of i dont know how you would guess this, but their likelihood of not offending or showing up goes up by this much if you know, if an Electronic Monitoring Program is used. I dont know. These are Great Questions and questions were interested in and thats why were going to work with California Policy Lab to answer some of these questions. I think there is literature out there that talks about it one way or the other. You know, were interested in this