Introduction This 2001 Georgia Strategy for Drug Control and Violent Crime Update is submitted to the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) in conformance with provisions of federal law (42 U.S.C. 3753(a)(1) promulgated to implement the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program authorized by Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3711, et seq., as amended. Consistent with the State's goal of an increased public awareness of the criminal justice system, affected agencies and interested persons are encouraged to review this document to understand and appreciate the State's strategy for drug and violent crime control programs that improve the functioning of Georgia's criminal justice system. Description Geographically diverse, with mountains in the north and coastal plains in the south, Georgia's 57,919 square miles make it the largest state east of the Mississippi River. Georgia has a varied landscape. A "fall line" across the center divides the State into a northern half that includes areas of rolling hills and low mountains, and a southern half made up of sections of the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the East Gulf Coastal Plain, both of which gradually increase in elevation toward the interior. The State currently ranks tenth in population among the states. According to the United States Census Bureau, the total population in 2000 was 8,186,453 an approximate 20% increase over the 1990 population of 6,478,216. For a variety of reasons, Georgia continues to experience the highest population growth rate in the South, and one of the highest rates in the nation. From the 1970s through the 1990s, Georgia's cities, especially Atlanta, experienced significant growth. There are eight Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) within the State of Georgia with a 1995 estimated population of 4,964,866. The most populated MSA is the metropolitan Atlanta area with over 3 million persons. Atlanta serves as a major economic center for the South and is the state capital. The State enjoys a diversified economy with a healthy balance of agriculture (poultry and eggs, peanuts, cattle, hogs, dairy products, vegetables), manufacturing (textiles and apparel, transportation equipment, food processing, paper products, chemical products, electric equipment), services, and tourism. The heavily wooded state is a leading producer of lumber, pulpwood, and resins and turpentine. The State's agriculture, forestry, and fishing industries expanded 38% from 1990 to 1996; Georgia's service sector increased by 41% during those years (Georgia Department of Labor, 1996). The interstate highway system in Georgia includes two major north-south arteries, I-75 and I-85, and an east-west route, I-20. Additionally, I-16 links Macon, in the center of the State with Savannah, a port city on the Atlantic Ocean. One of the busiest commercial airports in the nation is Atlanta Hartsfield International Airport, which is located in south metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia. Other metropolitan areas are also serviced by commercial air carriers, and the State is the site of many general aviation airports and private airstrips. Historically, the State has maintained a significant railway system, and two major north-south lines support considerable freight movement and passenger service. 1 The Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Declaring it to be "the public policy of Georgia to provide the necessary leadership to coordinate the major components of the criminal justice system by establishing a statewide coordinating body which represents all components and all levels of the criminal justice system," in 1981 the General Assembly of Georgia created the Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (Ga. L. 1981, pp. 1306-1311). Organizational Structure of the Council The Council is composed of twenty-four (24) voting members, fourteen (14) of whom serve in an ex-officio capacity by virtue of the position held by each, and (10) of whom are appointed by the Governor. Gubernatorial appointees include: One Sheriff One County Commissioner One Chief of Police One Superior Court Judge One Mayor One person knowledgeable of victim services in the state. Four persons knowledgeable about the criminal justice system in the state. Ex-Officio members include the following officials, who may designate a person to represent the member's constituent interests, attend and represent them at Council meetings. Chairperson of the Peace Officers Standards and Training Council Chairperson of the Georgia Organized Crime Prevention Council Chairperson of the Judicial Council of Georgia Chairperson of the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia Chairperson of the State Board of Corrections Chairperson of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles Chairperson of the Children and Youth Coordinating Council Vice-Chair of the Board of Public Safety President of the Council of Juvenile Court Judges Commissioner, Department of Corrections Commissioner, Department of Community Affairs Commissioner of the Department of Juvenile Justice State School Superintendent Director, Georgia Indigent Defense Council Responsibilities of the Council Pursuant to State statute (O.C.G.A 35-6A-7), the Council is vested with the following functions and authority: Prepare, publish and disseminate criminal justice information to all components of the criminal justice system; Serve as a statewide clearinghouse for criminal justice information and research; 2 Maintain a research program in order to identify and define issues and effective solutions; Develop criminal justice legislative proposals and executive policy; advise the Governor on criminal justice matters; and, Convene periodic statewide criminal justice conferences to develop, prioritize and publicize a criminal justice policy agenda. The Council has developed into an agency with collateral responsibility for the administration of both state and federal criminal justice grant programs. These include the Edward Byrne Memorial Formula Grant Program, Victims of Crime Act Grant Program, Violence Against Women Act Grant Program, State Crime Victims Compensation Program, Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant, and Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Program. It also holds an annual Statewide Crime Victims Conference. Criminal justice professionals and practitioners throughout the State are invited and encouraged to attend periodic meetings of the Council, which are conducted at least twice annually. Frequent attendees include defense attorneys, prosecuting attorneys, victim service providers, local law enforcement officers, and staff for the Attorney General's Office. Council Director The Director of the Council, who is appointed by the Governor and serves at his pleasure, employs professional, technical and clerical personnel to carry out the Council's duties and responsibilities; manages the multifaceted operations of the Council; and, manages and administers the business affairs of the Council. The Director also serves as a member of other criminal justice groups, including: Supreme Court Committee on Substance Abuse Georgia Courts Automation Commission Georgia Commission on Family Violence Georgia Police Corps Selection Committee Georgia Drug Abuse Reduction Education (DARE) Board The Edward Byrne Memorial State And Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program The Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program ("Byrne Program"), established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690, Title VI, Subtitle C) and implemented by the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program authorized by Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3711, et seq., as amended, is administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). This federal grant program places emphasis on violent and drug-related crime and serious offenders and on fostering multijurisdictional and multi-State efforts to support national drug-control priorities (BJA 1997), and assists the states and units of local government in carrying out specific programs that offer a high probability of improving the functioning of the criminal justice system. Both discretionary and formula grant funds are used to implement programs 3 that carry out 28 legislatively authorized purposes, including multijurisdictional task force programs. FY 2001 marks the 15th year of federal funding by the Byrne Program, which manages a discretionary grant program that awards funds directly to public and private agencies and private nonprofit organizations and a formula grant program, designed as a working partnership among federal, state, and local governments, that awards funds to the States, which in turn make "sub-awards" (or sub-grants) to State and local units of government for the purposes of enforcing state and local laws that establish offenses similar to crimes enumerated in the Federal Controlled Substances Act; improving the functioning of the criminal justice system; and, emphasizing violent crime and serious offenders. During FY 2000, $552 million was disbursed to the states, approximately $491 million of which was for formula grants and $52 million for discretionary grants. Program Purpose Areas The Byrne Program has established 28 purpose areas that define the nature and scope of programs and projects that might be funded under it: 1. Demand reduction education programs in which law enforcement officers participate. 2. Multijurisdictional task force (MJTF) programs that integrate Federal, State, and/or local drug law enforcement agencies and prosecutors for the purpose of enhancing interagency coordination and intelligence and facilitating Multijurisdictional investigations. 3. Programs designed to target the domestic sources of controlled and illegal substances, such as precursor chemicals, diverted pharmaceuticals, clandestine laboratories, and cannabis cultivations. 4. Providing community and neighborhood programs that assist citizens in preventing and controlling crime, including special programs that address the problems of crimes committed against the elderly and special programs for rural jurisdictions. 5. Disrupting illicit commerce in stolen goods and property. 6. Improving the investigation and prosecution of white-collar crime. 7A. Improving the operational effectiveness of law enforcement through the use of crime analysis techniques, street sales enforcement, school-yard violator programs, and gang-related and low-income housing drug control programs. 7B. Developing and implementing anti-terrorism plans for deep-draft ports, international airports, and other important facilities. 8. Career criminal prosecution programs, including the development of model drug control legislation. 9. Financial investigative programs that target the identification of money- laundering operations and assets obtained through illegal drug trafficking, including the development of proposed model legislation, financial investigative training, and financial information sharing systems. 10. Improving the operational effectiveness of the court process by expanding prosecutorial, defender, and judicial resources and implementing court delay reduction programs. 4 11. Programs designed to provide additional public correctional resources and improve the corrections system, including treatment in prisons and jails, intensive supervision programs, and long-range corrections and sentencing strategies. 12. Providing prison industry projects designed to place inmates in a realistic working and training environment that will enable them to acquire marketable skills and to make financial payments for restitution to their victims, for support of their own families, and for support of themselves in the institution. 13. Providing programs that identify and meet the treatment needs of adult and juvenile drug-dependent and alcoholdependent offenders. 14. Developing and implementing programs that provide assistance to jurors and witnesses and assistance (other than compensation) to victims of crime. 15A. Developing programs to improve drug control technology. 15B. Criminal justice information systems to assist law enforcement, prosecution, courts, and corrections organizations (including automated fingerprint identification systems). 16. Innovative programs that demonstrate new and different approaches to enforcement, prosecution, and adjudication of drug offenses and other serious crimes. 17. Addressing the problems of drug trafficking and the illegal manufacture of controlled substances in public housing. 18. Improving the criminal and juvenile justice system's response to domestic and family violence, including spouse abuse, child abuse, and abuse of the elderly. 19. Drug control evaluation programs that State and local units of government may utilize to evaluate programs and projects directed at State drug control activities. 20. Providing alternatives to prevent detention, jail, and prison for persons who pose no danger to the community. 21. Programs of which the primary goal is to strengthen urban enforcement and prosecution efforts targeted at street drug sales. 22. Prosecution of driving while intoxicated charges and the enforcement of other laws relating to alcohol use and the operation of motor vehicles. 23. Addressing the need for effective bindover systems for the prosecution of violent 16- and 17-year-old juveniles in courts with jurisdiction over adults for (certain enumerated) violent crimes. 24. Law enforcement and prevention programs that relate to gangs or to youth who are involved in or are at risk of involvement in gangs. 25. Developing or improving forensic laboratory capabilities to analyze DNA for identification purposes. 26. To develop and implement anti-terrorism training programs and to procure equipment for use by local law enforcement authorities. 5 27. Enforcing child abuse and neglect laws; including laws protecting against child sexual abuse and promoting programs designed to prevent child abuse and neglect 28. Establishing or supporting cooperative programs between law enforcement and media organizations; To collect, record, retain, and disseminate information useful in the identification and apprehension of suspected criminal offenders According to BJA, the authorized purpose areas for Byrne Formula Grant Program funding are "simply a legal construct allowing funds to be applied to a broad range of criminal justice and drug and violent crime prevention and control purposes." A purpose area might be associated with several programs, and programs in several purpose areas might be part of the overall response of the State to a specific established priority. Byrne Program Administrating Agency In Georgia, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council has been designated by the Governor to be the State Administrative Agency (SAA) for purposes of the Byrne Program. SAA operations in Georgia are supported, in part, by administrative funds that originate from the federal grant. The Council operates as a medium for the development and execution of Statewide approaches to the prevention of violence and drug abuse. In this capacity, it identifies the nature and scope of crime, recommends policies intended to marshal the State's resources in response to crime, and coordinates Statewide and community strategies that are implemented to address crime problems. Conscious of the importance of public safety, the Council promotes safe and healthy Georgia communities by convening diverse groups of affected persons, facilitating the productive exchanges of ideas on crime control, and providing the funds necessary to implement successful projects and promising prototype programs. Strategy Requirements under Federal Legislation The Byrne Formula Grant Program requires recipients to submit a strategy for the use of grant funds in order to obtain those funds. Both the legislation and BJA policy make it clear that this Statewide Strategy is more than just a "funding plan." Rather, it is the key component of the Byrne Formula Grant Program that sets forth a viable plan of action, based on comprehensive analyses of information about problems and needs from around the State. The strategy provides the foundation for achieving solutions to these problems and responding to these needs. It also provides the mechanisms by which the State can assess its progress in achieving its goals and continue planning. The strategies implemented by the individual States are instrumental in shaping and determining the success of national efforts against illegal drugs and violent crime. Yet, at its core, each State's strategy must aim to benefit that State alone, by providing a clear overview of how that State chooses to address its own problems. Thus, the Statewide Strategy should serve as a comprehensive blueprint for all coordinated drug and violent crime control efforts in the State utilizing federal, State, or local resources. Strategy development begins by examining the problems and resource needs of the State. This process establishes the priority issues that need to be addressed. The sources of information and advice for this process are myriad. Routine crime analyses, special user surveys, public hearings, and, especially, the advice of key criminal justice practitioners 6 from all levels of government come together as the basis for the Statewide Strategy. Documents prepared for other State uses, such as a compendium of Federal resources available to address drug control or firearm use in crimes or evaluation results from previously funded programs, can also inform this process. BJA encourages the States to utilize a strategic planning process that results in a product (Statewide Strategy) that is both long term and comprehensive. The Statewide Strategy should provide a full description of the SAA's strategic planning process, in addition to the documented findings and results of that process. Statewide Strategy At the core of the Byrne Formula Grant Program is the requirement that the states create a Statewide Strategy for combating drug-related and violent crime and for making criminal justice system improvements. The purpose of the strategy is to define the problems to be addressed, the manner in which they are to be addressed, and the method of measuring the resulting activities for effectiveness. The strategy should provide a comprehensive blueprint for dealing with the problems of drugs and violent crime on a statewide basis, and it should reflect the implementation and utilization of a complete strategic planning cycle. Although the Act stresses the fiscal and administrative compliance components of SAA responsibilities, BJA policy and guidance increasingly have been directed toward assisting SAAs with the important programmatic components of strategic planning, monitoring of sub-grantees, sub-grantee reporting, and evaluation of funded programs. This assistance is provided in recognition that, regardless of how well the SAA handles grant funds, the Byrne Formula Grant Program is of value only if those funds are used effectively to accomplish the goals of the legislation. Thus, nearly everything that the SAA does to implement and assess its strategy is part of a cycle, beginning with the strategic planning necessary to develop a statewide plan for action; continuing through implementation, programmatic oversight (sub-granting, monitoring, and reporting), and program evaluation; and culminating with the submission of the State Annual Report (SAR) covering all strategy-related activities. The components of this cycle are interdependent and mutually supportive. Furthermore, the cycle of strategic planning, implementation, and evaluation is continuous, with each set of activities leading to progress in meeting the priorities of the existing strategy while feeding into planning for the next strategy and the next year's funded programs. The SAA takes the lead in strategy development, strategy implementation, and strategy evaluation, while obtaining appropriate input from and maintaining coordination with other system agencies and interested parties. A complete strategic planning cycle ensures that the programming of Byrne Formula Grant Program funds is as effective and efficient as possible. The SAA's planning process undertaken during the ongoing strategic planning cycle (Strategy Development) is described under the Strategy BJA regards the SAA's strategic planning process as the key to effective administration of the Byrne Program. The common thread running through all elements in the Byrne planning and implementation cycle are the programs that the SAA develops as solutions to the problems identified and priorities established. In the strategy, the problems and needs identified by the State are translated into priorities for action. These priorities are then linked to one or more programs. A program concept is reflective of an ideal, to some extent, in that it has long-term goals that can be articulated but may not be easily attained or measured. However, the program concept must be turned into specific objectives, activities, and performance measures to become a working model for addressing a problem. At this point, the program is described in a Program Abstract that must be submitted to and approved by BJA before any funds may be sub-granted. 7 A program may involve an innovation developed by the State or an adaptation of a supposedly successful program from another jurisdiction. The program should be sufficiently generic to be implemented in more than one site within the State. Thus, it should have broad objectives and a range of alternative types of activities and performance measures that different sub-grantees can implement. The Multi-year Strategy BJA has determined that requiring a comprehensive Statewide Strategy once every three years appropriately accommodates the overall goals of the Byrne Formula Grant Program. This schedule provides the State with more flexibility, while redirecting resources toward making the overall process more accountable. Drugs, crime, and weaknesses in the justice system infrastructure are long-term problems; to address them effectively, the States need a planning process that is continuous and comprehensive in order to achieve expected results over a number of years. Such planning would establish and periodically review priorities addressed to long-term goals and ensure stable program funding for some period. The move to a 3-year cycle, which was begun in FY 1997, promotes the concept of ongoing strategic planning, review, and modification. At the core of this comprehensive strategy is direct linkage between priorities and programs funded. Priorities are identified and established by the SAA and its advisors based on the analysis of the problems and resource needs of the State. These priorities establish the framework of the implementation plan, which includes the identification of specific continued and new programs that will be funded to address these priorities. At Section 503(a)(1), the Act stipulates that the strategy must contain the following: A definition and analysis of the drug and violent crime problem in the State and an analysis of the problems in each of the counties and municipalities with major drug and violent crime problems. An assessment of the criminal justice resources being devoted to crime and drug control programs at the time of the grant application. Coordination requirements. Resource needs. The establishment of statewide priorities for crime and drug control activities and programs. An analysis of the relationship of the proposed State efforts to the National Drug Control Strategy. A plan for coordinating the programs to be funded with other federally funded programs, including State and local drug abuse education, treatment, and prevention programs. Amendments to the Act over time, and resulting BJA interpretations, however, have led to an overall broadening of these requirements, thus allowing the Statewide Strategy to address all aspects of crime and criminal justice. 8 Georgia Statewide Strategy Update 2001 The strategy update presented in this report is reflective of Georgia's efforts to remain responsive to the changing environment in which the State's criminal justice system operates. Planning and change management are important parts of leadership; as conditions change, organizations that coordinate multi-agency initiatives must keep pace with changes in their environment. A key element of the strategy continues to reflect a partnership of key agencies and persons. Demonstrating a commitment to such a partnership, the Council consistently engages affected stakeholders in a meaningful way, gathering their input on important issues, thus increasing their ownership of the strategy. In 2000, the Council met for its Fall Meeting to discuss and obtain input from various stakeholders represented on the Council. At this meeting, the allocation plan, which is part of the 2001 Byrne Application, was adopted. This strategic plan update builds on the priorities enumerated in the 2000 Strategy. It covers the 2001-2002 Fiscal Year and will be monitored and updated annually to ensure that targets are met and new problems are adequately addressed. Another comprehensive Statewide Strategy is planned for 2003. System Overview In order to fully appreciate Georgia's methods for addressing its multi-year strategy and the problems it confronts, it is necessary to understand that Georgia's criminal justice system is large and diverse. In each of Georgia's 159 counties, a Sheriff serves as the chief law enforcement officer, although primary law enforcement responsibilities have been assumed by county police departments in many counties. Hundreds of municipal, county, university, transit, and special purpose police departments in the State are responsible for the protection of the public, investigation of crimes, and apprehension of criminals. The elected District Attorney is the chief prosecuting officer for the State of Georgia within each of the State's 48 judicial circuits. The District Attorney represents the State of Georgia in the trial and appeal of criminal cases in the Superior Court for the judicial circuit and delinquency cases in the juvenile courts. The District Attorney is also the legal advisor to the grand jury. In 64 of the 159 counties in Georgia, misdemeanor cases are prosecuted by the Solicitor-General, who is an elected county officer who represents the State of Georgia in the trial and appeal of misdemeanor criminal cases in the State Courts. Indigent defense is provided by local bars and State and county-funded offices. The State's court system is comprised of a Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals of Georgia, and 48 judicial circuits, each with a court of general jurisdiction (Superior Court). Courts of limited jurisdiction in the State include state courts, probate courts, juvenile courts, magistrate courts, and municipal courts. The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles is the State's discretionary parole release and clemency agency that is responsible for the supervision of approximately 20,000 parolees. The Department of Juvenile Justice provides supervision, detention and a wide range of treatment and educational services for youths referred by juvenile courts. The Department of Corrections is responsible for the State's population of 42,000 inmates, and the supervision of 140,000 probationers. 9 The Georgia State Patrol enforces traffic laws on the State's highways, and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) provides assistance to the state's criminal justice system in the areas of criminal investigations, forensic laboratory services and computerized criminal justice information. The State Attorney General criminally prosecutes any State officer or person, firm, or corporation for violating any criminal statute while dealing with or for the State. According to the latest crime statistics, Georgia's violent crime rate measuring the number of murders, rapes, robberies, burglaries, larcenies, and auto-thefts per 100,000 residents is widely regarded as the "bell weather" for national and state trends (See Figure 1). As shown in Figure 1, Georgia and the U.S are both showing marked decreases in violent crime. In the State, the decrease in crime has been, at least partially, attributed to several developments: Continued efforts to expand Georgia's prison system and increase overall time served. Restorative justice that focuses on the harms of crime, empowering and responding to victims, and involving offenders in repairing the victim and the community. Community policing which incorporates a proactive stance and higher level of involvement with neighborhoods and businesses. Community courts with their innovative approaches to sanctioning and treating "quality-of-life" offenders (low- level offenders). Drug courts that closely supervise pre-trial defendants through stabilization and recovery. Community-based corrections that focuses on diversions, alternatives to incarceration, and reintegration of offenders. The decline is certainly welcomed, but Georgia and U.S. crime rates have exhibited similar swings over the past 20 years and crime over the past 50 years is still high. For example, in 1972, Georgia's murder rate dropped from 19 to 11 homicides per 100,000 residents in just five years, only to climb again to 17 homicides per 100,000 in 1982. This same up/down trend is found in other periods in Georgia history as well. 10 Figure 1 Viole nt Crime Ra tes For The U.S. And Ge orgia 19601998 (per 100,000 population) 800 U.S. 600 Georg ia 400 200 0 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 Current Sentencing Practices One reason for the decline in crime is the tougher sentencing and time served policies. Georgia inmates stay in prison longer than in most states, even though the percentage of time served falls below 85% for many crimes. This stems from the historical practice among Georgia judges of meting out severe sentences compared to the rest of the nation. Serving over 60% of a sentence in Georgia for non-violent and drug crimes still exceeds the prison time in other states that may require 85% or more time served. However, among violent and sex crimes, Georgia offenders already serve 85% of the sentence and can expect to serve longer as a result of the Board of Pardons and Paroles 1998 90% Time Served policy for all violent and sex offenders (See Figure 2, Sex Crimes). Offenders convicted of murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, aggravated child molestation, aggravated sodomy, aggravated sexual battery, and rape are already required to serve a 100% of a 10 year minimum prison term (ranges from 10 years to life). 11 Figure 2 Percent of Sentence Se rve d, Sex Crimes, 19721999 9 0% 7 0% 5 0% 3 0% 72 75 78 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 Georgia's Expanding Prison Population On average, Georgia's prison population doubles every ten years (See Figure 3), making Georgia one of the top ten states in the use of prisons. Currently, Georgia has a prison population of just over 41,000 inmates, and a 1999 incarceration rate of 529 inmates per 100,000 residents (See Figure 4). The State has expanded prison bed space by an unprecedented 118% between 1989 and 1998, from 15,312 prison beds to 33,331 beds. Prison Population and Budget Forecasts Figures 5a and 5b show the projected prison population through 2008, assuming an unchanged planning environment (Office of Planning and Budget (OPB), 1998). According to OPB projections, Georgia's prison population is expected to reach 56,000 by the year 2004. This projection assumes sentencing practices and the State Board of Pardons and Paroles 90% Time Served policy for violent offenders will remain in effect. To keep up with this projected pace in terms of new beds, Georgia's correctional budget would have to increase by 108% over the next ten years (See Figures 5a-5b). Such an increase is considerably higher than the anticipated increase in the overall state budget, which is expected to increase only 71%, exceeding, budgeted capacity (See Figure 6). Figure 3 Georgia Average Daily Prison Population, 1989 19 99 ( thous ands ) 45 40 35 30 25 20 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 12 Billions Of Dollars Millions Of Dollars Figure 5a Sta te of Ge orgia Budge t 25 ,00 0 20 ,00 0 71% Gr o wth $22B 15 ,00 0 10 ,00 0 5 ,00 0 75% Gr o wth $7.8B $13B 0 1990 1 995 20 00 20 0 5 2010 Fis cal Ye ar Figure 5b Ge orgia De partment Of Corre ction s Budge t 2000 1600 108% Gr o wth 1200 800 78% Gr o wth 400 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Fis cal Ye ar Figure 6 Projected Population and Capacity, 2000 to 2004 61,000 56,000 Po p u l atio n 51,000 46,000 Proj ection begins C ap aci ty 41,000 36,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Fis cal Ye ar 13 County Jail Populations Georgia county jails are also experiencing an unprecedented growth in the number of inmates awaiting trial, currently numbering more than 16,000 detainees. What is especially disturbing is the change in the past five years in these numbers. Figures 7 and 8 show the total number of inmates awaiting trial in all Georgia jails, which since 1990 has increased by 72% while the overall population has increased 74%. These trends have led many counties to consider and implement many innovative projects to reduce jail populations and the influx of new offenders, such as drug courts and residential substance abuse treatment (RSAT) programs. Figure 7 Coun ty Ja il Inmates Aw a iting Trial, 1990-1999 ( thous ands ) 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 16,490 +72% 99 Figure 8 Georgia County Ja il Popula tion, 1990-1999 ( thous ands ) 30 27 24 21 18 15 12 9 26,604 +74% 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Development Process and Coordination Issues The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Statewide Drug Control and Violent Crime Strategy development and planning process is a responsibility assumed by staff from different programs administered by the Council. The Council is committed to ensuring that the Statewide Strategy reflects the interests and concerns of criminal justice officials at all levels of government, as well as public officials who represent the State and its cities and counties. The primary goals of the Council regarding the new strategy were to create a Statewide Strategy 2000 that would encourage cooperation and coordination among agencies involved in drug and violent crime control efforts, and to establish a comprehensive approach to the problems being confronted by the State's criminal justice system. So that potential areas of overlap might be explored and to determine how similar goals and objectives can be met, Council staff coordinated with many local, state and federal agencies by commencing periodic statewide public hearings and Council meetings, attending other related agency meetings and workshops, conducting telephone and mail surveys of criminal justice agencies on Byrne related topics, and by analyzing the National Drug Control Policy. The Council is pleased to report that great progress continues to be made in developing constructive and collaborative relationships. 14 Coordination Among Criminal Justice System Entities in Georgia Diverse Council Membership The 2000 Strategy has stemmed, in large part, from the diversity of the Council's membership. The Council includes private citizens, representatives of State and local criminal justice agencies, and other affected groups. As noted earlier, the composition of the Council includes police chiefs, sheriffs, prosecutors, judges, court personnel, and representatives from the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Education, and the Department of Juvenile Justice. The corrections and juvenile justice representatives have a role in coordinating substance abuse treatment initiatives as well as other corrections issues. Coordination With Special Criminal Justice Entities The Council also provides and receives strategic planning input through membership on many other relevant committees and task forces. As previously mentioned, the Director of the Council serves as a member on numerous criminal justice bodies that provide a convenient forum for meaningful exchanges of information pertinent to the State's strategy. Additionally, Council staff and members meet on a regular basis with members of the Georgia Sheriffs' Association and the Chiefs of Police Association of Georgia to share information and coordinate planning efforts. Coordination efforts are further facilitated through the Council's Crime Control and System Improvement (CCSI) Advisory Committee that is comprised of a diverse representation from various levels of government, and also includes private citizens. CCSI provides input during the planning process, and it makes recommendations to the Council which makes the final recommendations to the Governor regarding funding priorities and sub-grant awards. Coordination with Law Enforcement Agencies Historically, coordination among federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in Georgia has been highly participative and structured toward the most effective uses of federal funding for drug control and violent crime reduction. The multi-year strategy enhances the day-to-day operational relationships among these agencies, and provides opportunities for policy makers to better plan resource allocations to support their activities. The Council is responsible for facilitating the coordination among state, local and federal agencies, and in fulfillment of this responsibility it requires each funded task force to include state and local law enforcement and federal agents, whenever possible. Absent such inclusion, the task forces are required to coordinate their activities and operational planning with the nearest federal agencies, including, but not limited to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the U.S. Customs Service (USCS), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Attorneys, and the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS). For example, the fugitive task forces in the State maintain very close contact with the local FBI and USMS offices that are involved in local task force strategic planning. Routinely, the DEA works closely and coordinates with local drug task forces. Each agency is responsible for operational planning which they do in coordination with the state or federal agencies working in their region. 15 Coordination is further enhanced by ongoing relations between the Council and the federal Law Enforcement Community Coordinators (LECC) in the U.S. Districts. Council staff maintain contact with LECCs in both the Northern District, Middle District of Georgia, and the Southeastern District all of whom participate in Council meetings. Representatives from the U.S. Attorney's Office in three districts have participated in training conferences and workshops conducted by the Council, and reciprocally, Council staff have attended workshops sponsored by federal prosecutors. Coordination with BJA Funded Programs Coordination with other BJA funded programs is comprehensive due, substantially, to the Council fulfilling its role as the administrating agency for many such grant programs. More recently, these programs have included the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program (RSAT) that was awarded to the Georgia Department of Corrections. The Council also administers the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program, the STOP Violence Against Women Grant Program, the Victims of Crime Act Grant Program, and the Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Grant Program. Juvenile Justice Coordination Annual State and local expenditures for juvenile justice in Georgia exceed $250 million. Coordination with juvenile justice related grants is accomplished by Council interaction with the Governor's Children and Youth Coordinating Council (CYCC), that has been designated by the Governor as the Statewide Administrative Agency (SAA) for the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) Program in Georgia. Staff members from the CJCC and the CYCC consult periodically to coordinate relevant funding decisions. Fiscal Year 1998 marked the inaugural funding by Congress for the JAIBG Program as a means of providing significant fiscal support to the states to promote increased accountability and improved services within the juvenile justice system. Similar to the Byrne Program, projects that are proposed by local governments must meet the terms of one of 12 designated program areas. Approved projects are funded, coordinated, and audited by the SAA. In response to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) executed by the State and the U.S. Justice Department regarding problems in the juvenile justice system, the CYCC earmarked a large portion of the first year of JAIBG funding to the State Department of Juvenile Justice. This allocation was made to expedite system improvements to avert future legal action by the federal government. The second year of JAIBG funding will have decreased the amount for the State agency as it comes closer to meeting the goals set forth in the federal memorandum. The CJCC anticipates that it will maintain appreciable contact with the CYCC and DJJ concerning the coordination of projects within respective program areas. Coordination with the National Drug Control Policy The latest National Drug Control Strategy includes five major long-range national goals: 16 Goal #1: Educate and enable America's youth to reject illegal drugs, as well as alcohol and tobacco. Goal #2: Increase the safety of America's citizens by substantially reducing drug- related crime and violence. Goal #3: Reduce health and social costs to the public of illegal drug use. Goal #4: Shield America's air, land, and sea frontiers from the drug threat. Goal # 5: Break foreign and domestic drug sources of supply. State Strategy Reflects National Priorities Historically, strategy submissions from Georgia have uniformly aligned with the evolving goals of the National Drug Control Policy. The above goals, which were most recently publicized in the 1999 National Drug Control Strategy, are integrated into Georgia's new multi-year plan. National Goal 1: Educate and enable America's youth to reject illegal drugs as well as alcohol and tobacco. Objective 1: Educate parents and other caregivers, teachers, coaches, clergy, health professionals, and business and community leaders to help youth reject illegal drugs and underage alcohol and tobacco use. Objective 2: Pursue a vigorous advertising and public communications program dealing with the dangers of illegal drug, alcohol, and tobacco use by youth. Objective 3: Promote zero tolerance policies for youth regarding the use of illegal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco within the family, school, workplace, and community. Objective 4: Provide students in grades K - 12 with alcohol, tobacco, and drug prevention programs and policies that are research based. Objective 5: Support parents and adult mentors in encouraging youth to engage in positive, healthy life-styles and modeling behavior to be emulated by young people. Objective 6: Encourage and assist the development of community coalitions and programs in preventing drug abuse and underage alcohol and tobacco use. 17 Objective 7: Create partnerships with the media, entertainment industry, and professional sports organizations to avoid the glamorization, condoning, or normalization of illegal drugs and the use of alcohol and tobacco by youth. Objective 8: Develop and implement a set of research-based principles upon which prevention programming can be based. Objective 9: Support and highlight research, including the development of scientific information, to inform drug, alcohol, and tobacco prevention programs targeting young Americans. The Drug Abuse Reduction Education (DARE) program, described in detail later in this report, is administered through the Council in coordination with other drug prevention funding available from the Drug Free Schools Act, as well as through State agencies and local boards of education. DARE is a national curriculum utilized in Georgia in support of National Goal No. 1 as follows: DARE supports these two national objectives through drug abuse lessons to children, and by providing similar information for their parents under the parent education component, and the effort to involve parents in the program. The training specifically identifies alcohol and tobacco as drugs to be avoided. DARE supports this national objective by targeting marijuana as a drug to be resisted in the several levels of DARE instruction in the schools. The DARE curriculum does not specifically attempt to raise the age of initial use, rather, it encourages avoidance of any use of marijuana. DARE provides a comprehensive drug education program as a part of the school curriculum which teaches school age children to resist drug use. DARE is a national program with a certified course of instruction that incorporates an established curriculum with didactic and interactive lesson formats together with uniform standards for DARE officer teaching certification. The product is a comprehensive educational program that can serve as a major component of national prevention standards and a prevention infrastructure. National Goal 2: Increase the safety of America's citizens by substantially reducing drugrelated crime and violence. Objective 1: Strengthen law enforcement -- including Federal, state, and local drug task forces -- to combat drugrelated violence, disrupt criminal organizations, and arrest and prosecute the leaders of illegal drug syndicates. Objective 2: Improve the ability of High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTAs) to counter drug trafficking. Objective 3: Help law enforcement to disrupt money laundering, seize, and forfeit criminal assets. Objective 4: Break the cycle of drug abuse and crime. Objective 5: Support and highlight research, including the development of scientific information and data, to inform law enforcement, prosecution, incarceration, and treatment of offenders involved with illegal drugs. The State's primary weapon in the war on drugs and violent crime will continue to be multijurisdictional task forces (MJTFS). State and local governments provide substantial resources to these task forces in conjunction with Byrne 18 Program funding to combat drugs and violence. The combined efforts of 26-30 local and one statewide task force will result in an anticipated 9,000+ drug arrests, including street, middle, and upper level distributors and traffickers. All Georgia MJTFS are required to participate, cooperate, and share intelligence with any federal law enforcement agencies working in their geographical areas of responsibility. Federal agencies working in conjunction with Georgia MJTFS have included the DEA, FBI, BATF, U.S. Customs, U. S. Marshals Service, U. S. Treasury, INS, and the U.S. Park Service. To further support national objectives, Georgia will fund four or more regional K-9 programs to provide canine assistance to drug task forces that cannot afford the cost of a drug dog and handler, or lack sufficient work to justify the expense of the canine team. The School Resource Officer (SRO) program, often coordinated in Georgia with the DARE program and in some cases having evolved from that program, provides an armed, uniform officer to serve in a proactive role in partnership with the local school officials providing a role model for students and enhancing safety in the school environment. Currently, over 10,000 students attend schools with School Resource Officer programs in Georgia utilizing Byrne funding. The Gang Related Education and Training Program (GREAT) is included in the multi-year strategy to encourage local jurisdictions to initiate these programs to counter gang activity together with its accompanying violence and drug abuse. Goal 3: Reduce health and social costs to the public of illegal drug use. Objective 1: Support and promote effective, efficient, and accessible drug treatment, ensuring the development of a system that is responsive to emerging trends in drug abuse. Objective 2: Reduce drug-related health problems, with an emphasis on infectious diseases. Objective 3: Promote national adoption of drug-free workplace programs that emphasize a comprehensive program that includes: drug testing, education, prevention, and intervention. Objective 4: Support and promote the education, training, and credentialing of professionals who work with substance abusers. Objective 5: Support research into the development of medications and related protocols to prevent or reduce drug dependence and abuse. Objective 6: Support and highlight research and technology, including the acquisition and analysis of scientific data, to reduce the health and social costs of illegal drug use. The priorities of Georgia's strategy will reduce costs resulting from illegal drug use by deterring youth through education (DARE), and deterring adults and youth through vigorous drug law enforcement (MJTFS), and as such, are supportive of Goal 3 in general. The specific national objectives stated in Goal 3 are related to efforts of the Health and Human Services agencies. Georgia's planning efforts include coordination with those agencies. 19 (Drug treatment and substance abuse programs that provide counseling, rehabilitation, and reintegration of juvenile offenders are coordinated by the CYCC with JAIBG funding) Adult offenders undergo an offender management program for substance abuse rehabilitation based on a project administered through the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles. Based on past performance, 33,500 inmates will receive mandatory drug tests, 2,204 will develop individual aftercare plans, and 475 will enter residential treatment, as conditions of their release from prison. The Council has initiated funding for a Day Reporting Center (DRC) through the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles and Georgia Department of Corrections. This initiative serves the high-risk, high needs segment of approximately 13,100 Atlanta Judicial Circuit offenders. The DRC will strive to offer a structured and effective community alternative to incarceration which will address the specific needs of substance abuse, unemployment or under-employment, along with the ability to successfully integrate into the community. The center will work to address the lack of community based drug intervention programs and reduce the recidivism rate of participating community corrections offenders. The Metropolitan Atlanta Council on Alcohol and Drugs (MACAD), no longer funded with Byrne funds, served as an information and referral database of substance abuse treatment resources for trial courts and judges statewide among Georgia's 48 Judicial Circuits. The system maintained current information on more than 700 alcohol and drug treatment providers and could be accessed in several different languages 24-hours a day via the internet. It represented a statewide resource for drug and other trial courts and enabled these entities to locate treatment resources, including the crucial aftercare component. While this project was successful in achieving its goals and objectives, it was funded for four years and is consequently no longer eligible for Byrne grant funds. Goal 4: Shield America's air, land, and sea frontiers from the drug threat. Objective 1: Conduct flexible operations to detect, disrupt, deter, and seize illegal drugs in transit to the United States and at U.S. borders. Objective 2: Improve the coordination and effectiveness of U.S. drug law enforcement programs with particular emphasis on the Southwest Border, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Objective 3: Improve bilateral and regional cooperation with Mexico as well as other cocaine and heroin transit zone countries in order to reduce the flow of illegal drugs into the United States. Objective 4: Support and highlight research and technology -- including the development of scientific information and data -- to detect, disrupt, deter, and seize illegal drugs in transit to the United States and at U.S. borders. National Goal 4 is a responsibility of most of the multijurisdictional task forces, and benefits from each project are listed to support those task forces under Georgia Priority one. Drug enforcement training supports these national objectives by providing state of the art training on all phases of drug enforcement, including updates on asset seizure and forfeiture techniques, to state and local officers, particularly those actively involved in drug enforcement. Additionally, the MJTFS are supportive of these national objectives. This support will vary with the precise degree of their involvement with the agency originally intercepting the information or intelligence concerning the shipment. Those located along the coast, adjacent to established airports or clandestine landing sites, and those operating along major interstate highways have more opportunity to participate in furthering this objective than do others not similarly located. 20 In conjunction with the Domestic Cannabis Eradication and Suppression Program (DCE/SP), which is administered by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Governor's Task Force on Drug Suppression (GTF) combats the growth of domestic marijuana on a Statewide basis. In addition to the GBI, this task force is comprised of the Georgia State Patrol, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Georgia Department of Transportation, and Georgia National Guard. Marijuana eradication is a year round effort by GTF, which focuses on outdoor plots from April through October and indoor marijuana operations year round. Goal 5: Break foreign and domestic drug sources of supply. Objective 1: Produce a net reduction in the worldwide cultivation of coca, opium, and marijuana and in the production of other illegal drugs, especially methamphetamine. Objective 2: Disrupt and dismantle major international drug trafficking organizations and arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate their leaders. Objective 3: Support and complement source country drug control efforts and strengthen source country political will and drug control capabilities. Objective 4: Develop and support bilateral, regional, and multilateral initiatives and mobilize international organizational efforts against all aspects of illegal drug production, trafficking, and abuse. Objective 5: Promote international policies and laws that deter money laundering and facilitate anti-money laundering investigations as well as seizure and forfeiture of associated assets. Objective 6: Support and highlight research and technology, including the development of scientific data, to reduce the worldwide supply of illegal drugs. All projects in Georgia's Statewide Strategy 2000 priority one are supportive of National Goal 5, Objectives 1 and 2, but the MJTFS are the primary means for initiating the arrest of distributors at street and mid-level, using that arrest as an investigative and intelligence tool permitting them to trace the drugs back up the chain of supply, until upper level and major offenders can be identified, their distribution points and methods determined, and their operations eventually disrupted through arrest and seizure of offenders and assets. In coordination with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation's Regional Drug Enforcement Offices, or with the DEA, or from their own intelligence sources, Georgia MJTFS (priority one) may interdict drugs imported and transshipped via state or interstate highways from the import point to destination markets. Coordination With Affected Organizations, the Public, and State Legislature Coordination with Affected Organizations The Council's staff continues to attend and receive input from affected organizations during interim strategy update years at the respective organizations' regularly scheduled meetings. 21 Coordination with the Public Coordination and planning for the 2000 multi-year statewide strategy included efforts to solicit input from the State's criminal justice system and the public at large. These efforts included advertised public hearings that establish a dialogue between various levels of government and community organizations to determine which Byrne projects are most desired and effective. These public hearings, which are held throughout the year in conjunction with other Council functions including Committee meetings and Council meetings, are announced in local newspapers to adequately notify the public. Public Hearing Date and Location August 25, 1999 White County Bank Community Room Cleveland, Georgia August 27, 1999 Legislative Office Building, Room 606 Capitol Square, Atlanta, Georgia August 31, 1999 Dougherty County Government Building Albany, Georgia Many individuals furnished pertinent information at the public hearings, the format of which was designed to encourage a focus on new approaches to address the State's drug and violent crime problem. A variety of issues were raised, most of which pertained to the expansion of special purpose programs, such as School Resource Officers (SRO), Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for inmates, Student Transition and Recovery project (STAR), special probation options, juvenile interventions, and adult sex offender management. A number of topics were related to alternatives to incarceration, drug courts, and rural law enforcement. Domestic violence was identified as a significant problem across the State, and especially noteworthy were the discussions of offender tracking, sheltering of abused women, coordination among agencies, and conditions of pre-trial release of alleged offenders. Responding to the Legislature The General Assembly of Georgia convenes in January each year, and during the 40-day session the Director of the Council attends numerous legislative oversight committee hearings to respond to legislators about the status of grant programs administered by the Council. Additionally, the Director consults with these legislators on matters relating to other State criminal justice programs and the anticipated effects of proposed legislation. Members of the Council staff also respond to legislative inquiries, and occasionally address committees to offer opinions on legislative initiatives. Members of the Council who are chairs of pertinent criminal justice committees are also invited to review the comprehensive strategy and provide comments. Additionally, legislative initiatives are routinely discussed at Council meetings and by Council staff participating in other criminal justice related meetings. 22 Advisory Board as Coordination Vehicle Council Advisory Board The Council is made up of six main committees: Executive Committee Crime Victims Assistance Advisory Committee Administrative Rules Committee Crime Control and System Improvement Advisory Committee Crime Victims Compensation Board Statistical Analysis Center Committee Coordination With Agencies Administering Federal Formula Funds for Drug Prevention and Control The Council recognizes that the drug problem in Georgia cannot be addressed or solved through the efforts of the criminal justice system alone. To be effective in the State's drug control plan, the Council must develop a comprehensive, coordinated approach that includes the active involvement of educators, treatment providers, and the local communities. Various state agencies and other organizations receive federal funding to support ongoing delinquency prevention, drug treatment, and educational programs, and the Council remains involved with the multifaceted drug prevention and education efforts in the State. To determine appropriate priorities, it is necessary to gather information from many different agencies because of multiple funding sources. These sources include the Byrne Grant, as well as the Drug Free Schools Act, the execution of which involves two different grant programs in Georgia. One part is administered by the Department of Human Resources and one part is administered by the Department of Education. The Drug Free Schools Act provides funds to 19 regional mental health regions through the Department of Human Resources. It also provides funding for all School Districts for drug and violence prevention programs. Others include federal and state recognized programs as well as locally developed drug prevention programs including the DREAM curriculum, Boys Town National Training Center materials, Second Step curriculum, Anger Management curriculum, Project Alert, and the SUPER Program. The Council collaborates with the Department of Education in assessing the impact of DARE projects throughout the State. The Council keeps in close contact with the DARE Officer Training program, which is a joint project of the GBI and the Department of Education. As mentioned above, the Director of the Council also is a member of and attends DARE Board meetings that are held quarterly. The Board consists of members of the Police Officer Standards and Training Council, the Chiefs of Police Association of Georgia, the Georgia DARE Officers Association, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Education, the Public Safety Training Center and other related agencies. Topics at the meetings include requests for DARE Officer Training, Middle/Junior High Training, DARE Parent Program Training, and Decertification of DARE officers. The Board also reviews and approves DARE Instructor Candidates before they can be certified. Substance Abuse Treatment Substance Abuse Treatment coordination efforts require communication with State agencies that administer the major correctional treatment programs. As the administrating agency for the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Grant 23 Program (RSAT), the Council has responsibility for coordinating correctional treatment programs under RSAT and the Byrne Program. These programs require coordination with treatment programs that are sponsored outside of the criminal justice system. The Department of Human Resources (DHR), Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse (MHMRSA), administers the federal Substance Abuse Block Grant Program, the funds from which are distributed to the 19 Regional Mental Health and Substance Abuse Boards throughout the State. The Regional Boards then prioritize and allocate these funds to a variety of substance abuse programs. The Department of Human Resources coordinates substance abuse treatment activities with the Georgia Department of Corrections and the Council coordinates its substance abuse treatment activities with both agencies. Nature and Extent of Drug Crime in Georgia The problem and effects of crime have significantly impacted Georgia's criminal justice agencies during the past decade. Rural and urban law enforcement agencies in Georgia have extended their staffing and operational budgets, local court dockets have expanded beyond manageable portions, and the State's correctional system has expanded to an unprecedented capacity. In order for Georgia to develop and implement an effective Statewide Strategy for drug control, violence prevention, and criminal justice system improvement, the State must first characterize the nature, extent, and trends of the problems to be addressed. Developments in the State continue to shape the challenges facing the criminal justice system, and policy makers throughout Georgia need to be continually apprised of those developments, especially as they relate to the capacity of the Georgia criminal justice system's achievement of attainable goals, most importantly the effective and efficient utilization of State resources to ensure the protection of Georgia citizens, businesses, and visitors. Data Sources for Problem Statement Research The Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council analyzed a variety of current, valid, and pertinent data in support of the development of the multi-year strategy, and pursued an aggressive agenda of research specific to crime trends and projections. The Council exploited various knowledge sources and involved multi-disciplinary experts in the study of the State's crime problems, and the outcome of the initiative is the establishment of a baseline level of information that will be needed in the State for a comprehensive, long-term strategy of innovative, yet pragmatic, solutions to identified problems. Analysis of Drug and Crime Problems and Trends When reviewing crime statistics, criminal justice agencies can make informed decisions concerning the most efficient and effective manner in which to dedicate limited resources toward the reduction of drugs and violent crime in the State and local communities. One emerging trend is the arrest rate for drug violations. As reflected in Figure 9, since 1994 Georgia has experienced an increase in the drug arrests for all drug violations, particularly possession. The substantial commitment of Byrne funds to Multijurisdictional task forces is certainly evident in arrest rates. Perhaps law enforcement has more time to devote to aggressive drug enforcement as a result of the overall reduction in crime or it represents an upswing in youth drugs, this trend deserves special attention in the upcoming years. 24 Figure 9 Georgia Drug Arre st Trend s, 1980-1998 600 (per 100,000 population) All Drug V iolations 500 400 300 Possess ion 200 100 Sale /M anufacturing 0 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 Juvenile Crime: National Trends According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), juvenile violent crime is at its lowest level since 1987. The agency reports that from 1994 to 1998 juvenile violent crime has dropped 30 percent. Drawing upon the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports data, the OJJDP reports significant decreases for every violent crime, including a nearly 50 percent drop in the juvenile murder arrest rate from 1993 to 1998. In addition to murder and weapons law violations, the agency also showed other drops in juvenile arrest rates: forcible rape -- down 25 percent from 1991 to 1998; aggravated assault -- down 20 percent from 1994 to 1998; robbery -- down 45 percent from 1995 to 1998, and now at its lowest level since 1980; burglary down 22 percent from 1989 to 1998 and 50 percent from 1980 to 1998; larceny-theft down 4 percent from 1989 to 1998; motor vehicle theft down 39 percent from 1989 to 1998; and arson down 23 percent from 1994 to 1998, and now at its lowest level since 1990. The National Center for Policy Analysis reports, however, that according to the U.S. Census Bureau there will be 1.8 million more males 14 to 24 years old, the most crime-prone group, in the year 2005 and 1.2 million more in 2010. Noting that over the next ten years, the population of 14 to 17 year olds will grow 23 percent, the Center predicts that crime will increase along with the juvenile population, and that juvenile arrests for violent crimes will more than double by the year 2010 if recent national trends continue. These trends are echoed in Georgia where the juvenile population is expected to increase substantially over the next six years (See Figures 10-11), particularly among high-risk youths such as African-American males under age 17. 25 Figure 11 Projecte d Increase in Ge orgia Population Ages 1 3-17, 1998-2020 30% 20% 10% Gene ral Popula tion Age 13-17 0% 98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Ye ar Juvenile Crime: Georgia Trends Although juvenile crime is dropping statewide among major crime categories, the drug arrest trends are disturbing. Since 1994, juvenile drug arrests, especially for possession, has increased dramatically although show a slight downturn in 1998 (See Figure 12). If such trends continue unabated at the same time Georgia expects an increase the juvenile population, Georgia should be prepared for an substantial influx of juveniles into the system. Figure 10 Projecte d Increa se in Georgia Popula tion Ye ar Age s 1 3-17, 199 8-2020 40% 30% 20% 10% Afr ic a n-Am e r ic a n Males General P opula ti on Caucasian Males 0% 98 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Ye ar 26 Figure 12 Georgia Juvenile Arre st Trend s (Drug s), 1980 1998 (per 100,000 population) 300 250 All Dr ug V iolations 200 150 100 Possess ion 50 Sale /M anufacturing 0 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 Areas of Greatest Need In considering all information, the Council maintains its previous recommendations concerning the greatest areas of need for the next three years for the 2001-2002 Strategic Plan Update: Rural crime is a problem in Georgia. Rural areas are used to produce drugs, such as marijuana and methamphetamines, and they are used as transshipment points for drugs and cash from drug sales. Also, urban street gangs are setting up operations in rural areas. Drug trafficking is seen as the main reason for the expansion of these gangs to rural areas. The many and continuous successes of the Multijurisdictional drug task forces in Georgia demonstrate that local authorities can work very effectively to combat illegal drugs in Georgia's rural areas, where there is a need for the continued augmentation of law enforcement resources in order to adequately address violent and drug-related crime. DARE , STAR, and SRO programs are needed in Georgia school districts where local law enforcement agencies need assistance in initiating school safety projects. Expansion of K-9 teams, so that more areas of the State can benefit from bomb threat responses, drug and safety searches in public schools, canine tracking of suspects. Diversion programs for drug addicted adult offenders (e.g, drug courts, RSAT, day treatment centers, etc.). Improved coordination of law enforcement intelligence among federal, State, and local agencies. Regional intelligence coordination resolve conflict and facilitate exchanges. The accuracy and completeness of criminal justice records, in particular criminal history records indexed to singleand multi-state offenders, enhances the capacity of the State to prevent the sale of firearms to prohibited persons, 27 properly register and publicly list violent sexual offenders, and protect Georgia's children from child abusers. Federal legislation requires that each state receiving Byrne program formula funding set-aside at least 5% of the annual total award for the improvement of its criminal justice records. The State of Georgia is proposing the allocation of that 5%, plus an additional $500,000.00 for Fiscal Year 2000 for its Criminal Justice Records Improvement (CJRI) plan. While currently over 50% of the fingerprint workload of the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) is received electronically, many jurisdictions in the State lack "live scan" devices that permit the electronic transfer of fingerprint images and related data to the State agency responsible for the maintenance of Georgia's computerized criminal history data base which includes the fingerprint and criminal history records of more than 1,700,000 persons (Georgia ranks fourth in the nation in the number of criminal fingerprint records processed each year; only California, New York, and Florida process more post-arrest criminal fingerprints than Georgia.) "Live scan" technology enables states to update criminal history record information in a matter of hours, rather than weeks, as is the case of the mailing of fingerprint cards to the GCIC. The automation of prosecution and judicial disposition reporting is a priority in Georgia. Paper disposition reporting methods do not allow for the identification of significant shortfalls in reporting, such as delinquent dispositions, and preclude expedited updates of important criminal history record information. Previous allocations have funded pilot tests of interfaces among law enforcement, prosecution, and courts; the development of record and interface standards; and, competitive awards to local court clerks. Full statewide automation of court dispositions remains a critical need. In 1999 and with support from Byrne funds, the Georgia Governor formed a sentencing commission to assess the need for and to outline the plan for development of guidelines. As proposed by the Commission, the new sentencing guidelines would be voluntary in nature, and would apply to all felony crimes in Georgia, except the seven "serious violent felonies." This system of descriptive guidelines, which would be based on historical sentencing practices in the State, would provide guidance for judges as they contemplate both the type of sentence (prison, probation) and duration of the sentence. In 2001-2002, the Council is planning to support actual development of the voluntary sentencing guideline for implementation in 18-24 months. Develop and implement effective day treatment centers for probationers and parolees with a history of substance abuse - alcohol and illegal drugs. Priorities and Program Responses (in Order or Priority) The major goals for Georgia's Statewide Strategy Update 2001continues to be represented by the following: 1. Reduction of trafficking of illegal drugs and narcotics in and through the state; 2. Reduction of violent crime in Georgia, particularly drug-related violence and insidious violence such as domestic violence; and, 3. Enhancement of cooperation and coordination between and among those agencies vested with the responsibility to address serious crime in Georgia. The major objectives, which individually and collectively support each of the major goals established for this strategy, are anticipated to: 28 A. Reduce the demand for, as well as the availability of, drugs, narcotics and illegal substances, through drug abuse resistance education for youth, and vigorous enforcement of drug laws, including drug related traffic offenses; B. Improve the operational effectiveness of law enforcement agencies and personnel by enhancing training, providing canine support, intelligence exchange, and other initiatives supportive of multijurisdictional enforcement efforts; C. Improve records keeping, data-gathering, and processing of forensic evidence concerning crime so that appropriate resources may be targeted at and to appropriate audiences; and, D. Support and assist efforts by various agencies to combine talent and resources in order to broadly affect the crime and drug problems in multiple jurisdictions. These goals and objectives are necessarily broad because the problems that contribute to violent crime and drug abuse are diffuse. It is the role of the Council to facilitate cooperation and collaboration in Georgia's criminal justice community, so that resources are best utilized to address crime-related problems within the State. Facilitating Objective SAC Collaboration In an effort to facilitate improved, and more appropriate use of limited resources, the Council will continue to utilize the data gathering and analysis capabilities of the Statistical Analysis Center (SAC), which is organized under the Council. Stated concisely, the objective of the SAC is to provide policy-makers and decision-makers in Georgia with the best, most reliable and valid information on the nature, extent and location of crime and crime victims so that programs, initiatives and resources may be better focused to meet the needs of the State and its citizens. As a "facilitating objective," the Council will assist the SAC in accomplishing agency and citizen surveys in the future that will then be incorporated into the strategies, goals and objectives for subsequent years. Future research activities are anticipated to include assessments of Byrne-funded programs to enhance the Council's evaluation and planning initiatives. It also should provide pertinent information about existing and new program and project types to determine their effectiveness. Strategy Priority #1 Drug Enforcement Statement of the Priority Issue: The reduction in the flow of illegal drugs into and through the State by improving the operational effectiveness of law enforcement agencies and personnel, by enhancing training, canine support, and other initiatives supportive of multijurisdictional enforcement efforts. Multijurisdictional Task Force Initiatives (Byrne Purpose Area 2) The multijurisdictional task force initiative is the most familiar of the Byrne Programs in Georgia, and is considered by many to be the most productive. According to law enforcement executives, the program accomplishments are directly attributable to the diligence and dedication of the officers from numerous jurisdictions throughout Georgia who serve on these task forces. 29 In 2000, $5,667,969 in Byrne federal funds were allocated to drug task forces. Typically, the Council allocates 60% of each year's Byrne funding to the task forces. Within that allocation, approximately 90% is specifically dedicated to drug enforcement, 3% to task forces specifically assigned to locate and arrest violent and drug crime fugitives from justice, 2% to Statewide drug training, and 5% for canine support. Originally, the drug task forces (MJTFs) were primarily located in rural counties and small to medium sized cities. While many of the presently funded units are located within one of the eight "Metropolitan Statistical Areas" in Georgia, the participants are still relatively smaller local agencies. Historically, these agencies have generally lacked the opportunity to partner extensively with Federal agencies in a continued drug control effort. This impediment resulted primarily because of geographical location and the different sectors of the drug market which the respective agencies target as their primary mission(s). These multi-jurisdiction task forces target three levels of drug distribution that vary in volume among the jurisdictions, including major, mid-level, and street-level distributors. The drugs of choice vary in the different jurisdictions of the State, so accordingly enforcement tactics and results differ among the funded task forces. As an indicator of the productivity of these units, from July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000, the local MJTFs seized over $34,740,021.85 in drugs and resulted in approximately 10,536 (27%) of the 38,234 drug arrests statewide. 2001 Objectives Continued statewide MJTF operations Development of new allocation formula Development of standardized evaluation criteria Proposed Award: $7,307,678 State Drug Task Force (Byrne Program Purpose Area 2) The Council recognizes that it is not fiscally possible to fund a MJTF, nor to provide the specialized equipment needed for covert drug investigations, in every jurisdiction in Georgia. The Council acknowledges that local resources do not permit many smaller agencies to dedicate personnel to necessary advanced training, nor to redirect from patrol activities resources that are required to successfully pursue drug related criminal activities. In recognition, the State Drug Task Force (SDTF) was organized to provide assistance to jurisdictions in the State that lacked sufficient resources to conduct covert drug investigations in response to identified drug crimes, including violent crimes associated with drug trafficking. It provides special covert investigations to those jurisdictions not able to participate in a MJTF, or to those in a MJTF but requiring covert investigative assistance due to an unusual drug problem. Local requests for special drug enforcement assistance are channeled through one of the 15 Regional Investigative Offices operated by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI), that directs this project. In the event a regional office can respond to the request for assistance, the request is forwarded to the SDTF for action. These covert operations provided significant drug enforcement assistance throughout the State. In 1999-2000, the SDTF continued to initiate drug cases that may have never been made without the assistance of Byrne funds due to insufficient resources at the local level. 30 Regional K-9 Multijurisdictional Resource Team (Byrne Program Purpose Area 2) The K-9 unit is an invaluable resource to the State's MJTFs and local law enforcement agencies in the war against drugs and violent crime. Unfortunately, the expense of acquiring and maintaining this resource for each MJTF or agency is cost-prohibitive. An important consideration for case prosecution was that smaller agencies and many MJTFs do not have a sufficient workload for K-9s to maintain a needed level of proficiency. The Council also discovered that locally sponsored MJTFs often lacked uniform standards for training and certification of their K-9 teams With considerable input from potential users of the resource, and from operational K-9 units, the Council developed the concept of Statewide Regional K-9 Resource Teams. The project requires a suitable site for a statewide training center, a statewide training coordinator qualified to train other K-9 handlers, appropriate courses of instruction, and an agency willing to undertake the project. In Fiscal Year 2000, two teams shared $251,999 in federal funding. Additionally, $500,000 was provided to the K-9 Resource Team and State Certification Training Task Force. The Chatham County Sheriff's Office was the first agency to sponsor a Regional K-9 Team, and the funded project quickly gained wide acceptance in the geographical area of responsibility. First year activities were substantial, and productive. Subsequent years also yielded significant accomplishments. These efforts led to 5,541 searches, 100 demonstrations, 573 misdemeanor arrests, 451 felony arrests, thousands of local, state, and federal requests for assistance. 2001 Objectives Continued operation of K-9 Units and expansion to include one or more regional K-9 units. Proposed Award: $917,000 Drug Enforcement Training Byrne Program Purpose Area 2) The Georgia Public Safety Training Center (GPSTC) is located on 620 acres in Monroe County approximately 50 miles south of Atlanta, the capitol of the State. The Center is a comprehensive training complex designed to address the needs of state and local public safety and judicial personnel. Secondary objectives of the Center are to promote cooperation and cross-training among the various disciplines utilizing the facility, to attract the best qualified candidates to a career in public safety, and to attract out-of-state trainers to the Center in order to enrich Georgia's training program. Nine resident agencies have responsibility for training the various disciplines of public safety at the Center. Programs for law enforcement, firefighting, corrections, and emergency medical services are routinely provided, and the Center provides basic, specialized, and advanced training relevant to drug enforcement including training on related areas such as community policing techniques, basic Spanish, and managing confidential informants. In Fiscal Year 2000, the Center received $378,686 and provided 102 courses to 3,805 students. Due to the broad range of specialized courses, the DET Project was able to offer in-service classes to various local jurisdictions in addition to individual courses held at the Training Center. Of the 3,805 officers attending, 3,724 successfully completed the training regimen. The Council is pleased with the level of successful course completion, considering the nature of the 31 specialized courses, the wide range of skill and educational levels of the officers attending from all regions of the state, and the extremely large number of officers trained. 2001 Objectives Continued support of the DET Project. Proposed Award: $385,961 Financial Investigations Unit (Byrne Program Purpose Area 9) Due to the need in Georgia for the support of a statewide investigative unit to respond to the requests of local law enforcement for assistance in the areas of financial and computer investigations, the Council supports a Georgia Bureau of Investigations (GBI) financial investigations unit. This unit maintains personnel with the expertise to assist and train local law enforcement. It is skilled in public record research, the Bank Secrecy Act, financial institution operations, common business and accounting practices, source and expenditure analysis, and the laws of forfeiture. The units provides all financial investigative services requested by CJCC funded drug task forces. The number of drug cases in which FIU assistance is requested has increased dramatically, particularly in the months following the specialized training conducted by the unit for drug task forces. Each case (opened as a result of a request from a drug task force or in connection with a drug case) is scrutinized by the Control Board. Those meeting the criteria toward fulfilling the goals and objectives of the Byrne grant are approved as grant cases. A total of 41 cases worked during the 2000 Fiscal Year have resulted in the seizure of $1,120,494.99 in assets. The program instituted by the Financial Investigations Unit to provide Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) and Western Union currency transactions as lead information to drug task forces has continued to be a very popular program. The SAR Program is now firmly established with updated information being provided every two months to those task forces who requested it via questionnaires sent from the Financial Investigations Unit. Additionally, data on Western Union currency transfers exceeding $3,000 is also provided to those task forces that indicated they wished to receive it. Classes in FIU services and public records searches were developed and put on specifically for the drug task forces at locations convenient to their operations. It is anticipated that additional courses will be developed specifically for them in the upcoming fiscal year pertaining to computer searches and executing search warrants for financial information. (In addition to the courses for the CJCC drug task forces, members of the unit continued to provide courses on white collar crimes, public records and public database searches and sources of information classes). The Byrne Grant for the Financial Investigations Unit has provided training to squad members and specialized assistance to drug task forces that would have not otherwise been possible. FIU will continue to strive to provide the best services and assistance possible to CJCC funded drug task forces and other agencies charged with the responsibility for enforcing Georgia's drug and asset forfeiture laws. 2001 Objectives Continued operation of FIU units. Proposed Award: $215,000 32 Forensic Services Upgrade (Byrne Program Area 15A) In today's world of crime and illegal drugs, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation's Crime Laboratory must be ready to respond to the scientific needs of criminal justice agencies. The scientific information provided must be accurate and timely to enable these agencies to detect, apprehend, and prosecute criminals. Services at the State Crime Lab are provided to law enforcement at no charge and are conducted through a series of seven laboratories strategically located throughout the state. The labs analyze questioned documents, trace evidence, latent fingerprints, firearms, alcohol and drug tests, and all human biological samples collected for Serology/DNA, toxicology, and pathology including specimens submitted by the medical examiner from autopsies performed to establish the cause of death. The laboratories are experiencing an ever increasing caseload. In Calendar Year 1997, for example, requests for services jumped from 111,320 to 118,342. The continued growth in caseloads has impeded the turn-around time in laboratory tests far beyond the established goal of 30 days. The GBI recognizes that new and expanded facilities must be built, scientific positions must be added for crime laboratories statewide, and additional equipment must be procured in order to address this problem. The Byrne Grant provided funds to assist the agency in achieving the following goals to provide relief to the GBI Crime Laboratories: 2001 Objectives Death Investigations Enhancement Since 1997, GBI-DOFS has seen a significant increase in the number of autopsies performed, rising from an average of 1,464 per year in 1997 to the current level of approximately 1,720 per year. This increase has limited the capabilities of the current medical examiner investigators to handling telephone inquiries, preparing initial paperwork for physicians, and handling evidence. As a result, information that is necessary for the investigation of the case can not expeditiously be obtained and relayed to law enforcement officers and vice versa. In addition, the evidence that is being collected at the time of autopsy is substantially delayed in being submitted to other laboratory sections. This delay has been responsible for some of the laboratory's criticism of not being able to timely process rush requests. The proposed solution is to add personnel resources to certain key laboratory functions which directly support Death Investigation activities, increase the biological handling capacity of the Toxicology section by adding a robotics apparatus, provide external firearms training to new examiners, and utilize voice-recognition software to assist with autopsy transcription. The functions affected are: medical examiner investigation, medical examiner support, firearms identification and support, trace evidence case processing, blood alcohol/toxicology case processing, and toxicology DUID case reduction. 2001 Objectives To continue operations of the Death Investigations Enhancement Proposed Award: $300,188 33 Strategy Priority #2 Drug Prevention and Education Statement of the Priority Issue: The reduction of the demand for, as well as the availability of drugs, narcotics, and illegal substances, through drug abuse resistance education for youth. Local Law Enforcement DARE Program (Byrne Program Purpose Area 1) Federal funding for Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) in Georgia flows through the Council to the individual local school districts for drug education and prevention efforts. In an effort to initiate more drug abuse programs throughout the State, the Council does not award Byrne funds for use in localities that are already utilizing federal or local funds to provide such programs, nor to continue such programs once established. Rather, the Council has traditionally approved Byrne funding as seed money to establish new and innovative drug prevention and education programs. DARE is a comprehensive educational program designed to educate youth to the dangers of drugs, including alcohol and tobacco, and discourage them from abuse of those substances. Collateral benefits include: enhancing self-esteem, developing decision making and interpersonal skills, and very importantly, providing a setting in which youth interact with police officers in a positive context. Georgia utilized 2000 Byrne funds to allow 2,074 youth to complete the Elementary School curriculum, the basic DARE training. Response to the DARE program is almost universally positive among local educators, law enforcement, parents, the community, and very importantly, with the youth who participate in the program. The Council anticipates that fewer will be eligible for funding in the next few years. The Council anticipates that fewer jurisdiction will be eligible for funding in the next few years, given the substantial number of DARE projects initiated by the Council and the widespread implementation of locally funded programs. Therefore, only $119,361 was allocated to this program in 2000. 2001 Objectives The Council will continue funding DARE projects for eligible sub-grantees, and anticipates a 97 percent overall graduation rate from DARE Elementary and Middle School projects. Proposed Award: $14,500 School Resource Officer (Byrne Program Purpose Area 1) The School Resource Officer (SRO) program, which the Council considers to be community policing practiced in the school environment, serves as a proactive deterrent to drug and violent crime, while providing a positive role model to students and encouraging cooperation between law enforcement, educators, youth, and parents. The SRO can be a useful project for jurisdictions that cannot fund a DARE program, or as a complement to the DARE program. The SRO program is particularly reassuring to students and educators, especially where there is violence, or the strong perception of violence, in the schools, or in the immediate vicinity of the campus. 34 In 2000, $237,970 in Byrne funding was allocated for SROs in Georgia. Those uniformed officers responded to 4,745 complaints, effected 644 arrests (including 133 felonies), issued 947 traffic warnings or citations, and recovered 19% of the property reported to them as stolen or lost. In addition, 980 instances of assistance to other local law enforcement were documented, and 4,133 conferences with students were conducted by the SRO's. 2001 Objectives Proposed Award: $107,840 State DARE Officer Training (Byrne Program Purpose Area 1) Through a collaborative effort with the Georgia Department of Education, the GBI operates the DARE Training and Certification Program for all DARE officers in Georgia, including those funded through local, Byrne, or other funding sources. This includes certification on the instruction of the DARE program, and the annual in-service training required to maintain DARE Officer instructor certification. In addition, on-site monitoring by a GBI Instructor is performed to assure that the instructing techniques, as well as the DARE curriculum, are being properly presented by the SRO's. 2001 Objectives The funding for this program was continued by the GBI utilizing State dollars at the conclusion of the 48-month eligibility period. The Council will continue to utilize the program for verification of certification of DARE officers and evaluations of their performance. Strategy Priority #3 Criminal Justice Records Improvement Statement of the Priority Issue: The priority issue is Criminal Justice Records Improvement (CJRI) in the State of Georgia. The primary response for CJRI improvement has included the collection of delinquent dispositions, compliance audits, assistance with standardized reporting software, and supporting technology to provide automated records and dispositions. Cognizant of the importance of this vital resource to the justice system, in the 2000 Byrne Program Year, the Council approved $490,406 for CJRI. GCIC Local Audit Team (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15B) Part of the 5% set-aside mandated under the Byrne Program supports the Local Audit Team. The Team was allocated $300,000 in 2000 to expand the scope of the audits to expedite the collection of delinquent dispositions. Among other noteworthy accomplishments, the team audited local agencies for compliance with records submission while collecting and processing 13,822 delinquent dispositions in the grant period. 35 2000 Audit Team Objectives: The Council anticipates that the team will audit hundreds of local agencies for compliance with the 2001 program, with the possible location of 500,000 delinquent or missing dispositions as a collateral benefit of the compliance audits. Automation of Criminal Dispositions (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15-B) The Council is supporting implementation of the CJRI Plan which is a supplement to this Report. The other major project funded from the 5% Byrne Program set-aside is the courts automation project that facilitates the automated electronic submission of court records, including: arrest records, criminal charges arising from those initial arrests, modifications of those charges, final dispositions of the criminal charges, and custody status records on the offender. With 159 county court systems, each of which individually reports and records, the project is substantially challenged. During previous grant years, the Georgia Courts Automation Commission (GCAC) embarked on an effort to assist courts within Georgia's 159 counties in automating case record systems. Due to the fact that GCAC has pushed automation as far as practical, funds are now made available to Georgia Superior Court Clerk's Council and local jurisdictions to implement automation projects. One example of this is the Byrne funded Fulton County-City of Atlanta initiative. During the 2000 Grant Year, the two entities combined forces to establish an Automated Case Disposition System (ADS). Prior to the establishment of an ADS system, case disposition was manual and antiquated. This resulted in inaccurate, inefficient dispositions being submitted to the Georgia Crime Information Center. 2001 Objectives Funding will be made available to automate criminal dispositional reporting systems and create electronic interfaces with the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC). Proposed Award: $350,000 Local Live Scan (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15B) Live scan systems convert fingerprint records to digital images, which can then be transmitted and stored electronically in computer databases. This conversion greatly expedites record searches and identification of newly arrested offenders, and eliminates the majority of manual processing and manual record searches. Live scan prints of arrested persons are quickly transmitted to the State and national repositories for matching with existing fingerprint records. This provides a positive identification of the offender, and alerts the arresting agency to any outstanding charges. Continued automation of this system is a prerequisite to eliminating the current backlog in criminal fingerprint cards that await processing at the national repository. Live scan technology also reduces the time required for law enforcement agencies to be notified by the FBI or the State repository that an arrestee is wanted in other jurisdictions, or to receive an expedited response to an inquiry regarding possible matches of crime scene latent prints. The difference in response time on persons newly arrested and booked can be accurately stated: live scan reporting to a state with an Automated Fingerprint Identification System takes two-hours, compared to a 4-8 week response from non-automated systems. 36 2001 Objectives The Council anticipates the awarding of more live scan projects to local agencies in 2001 to continue the dissemination of this technology that is so vital to Georgia communities. In addition to the 5% set-aside, the Council will allocate an additional $500,000.00 in 2001 for proposed live scan projects. Sexual Violent Offender Registry (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15B) To assist in compliance with the requirements of Public Law 103-322, the Wetterling Act (1994), and the subsequent requirements of Megan's Law, PL 104-145 (1996), the Council has funded three projects in previous years. Several years ago, Byrne Program funding was allocated to the GBI to complete a sexual offender database at the State repository. Database funding was then assumed at the State level. Also, Byrne Program funding provided the Georgia Sheriffs' Association with funding to provide computer terminals to Sheriffs' Offices, primarily in rural jurisdictions that lacked the necessary equipment to link them with the Sexually Violent Offender Registry (SVOR) maintained at the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC). Byrne Program funding has also been used to assist the Georgia Department of Human Resources to establish the administrative framework and convene the initial meetings of the sexual offender registry board, which the original Wetterling Act required. The Board determines if a registered offender is to be classified as a sexual predator, which is a "lifetime" designation. The sexual predator classification involves a more stringent registration and notification requirement under the Wetterling Act than is required for sexual offenders not classified as predators. 2001 Objectives Byrne Funds will continue supporting the Sexual Offender Registry Board until the Spring of 2001. The project will subsequently be funded through State funds. Gulf States Counterdrug Initiative (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15B) The Georgia Bureau of Investigation's Intelligence Unit operated the Gulf States Counterdrug Initiative project (GSCI), which was an expansion of the previously funded Statewide Narcotics Information and Intelligence Exchange (SNIIE). This project permitted the Byrne program-funded local MJTFs to participate in a multi-state intelligence network, thus providing a mechanism to facilitate sharing information among participating local, State and federal agencies. Due to the 48-Month Program Expiration Rule, the project will no longer be supported with Byrne Funds. Strategy Priority #4 Offender Drug Treatment Statement of the Priority Issue: Providing programs to address the treatment needs of adult and juvenile drug and alcohol dependent offenders. 37 Parolee Drug Testing, Treatment & Rational Thinking Skills (Byrne Program Purpose Area 13) Over 60% of all inmates annually admitted to Georgia prisons report some form of substance abuse problem, over 50% of the standing inmate population is diagnosed with a drug abuse problem, and over 30% have a diagnosed alcohol problem. Approximately 20 percent of the inmates were committed for a drug crime or an alcohol-related crime. The Georgia Department of Corrections mandates a drug education course for all inmates, a 35- day program for those with more severe substance abuse diagnoses, and the department recently added a federally funded six-month Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program (RSAT) for hard core, chronic drug abusers. Research has demonstrated that prison based treatment is far more effective in reducing recidivism when follow-up (aftercare) is required after the offender's release from treatment in prison. In 1996, the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles received funding to provide enhancement of an aftercare program for paroled inmates at risk for substance abuse. To assure their successful transition back into the community, the Board trained and certified life-skills coaches as cognitive skills coaches in an effort to expand the cognitive skills training for parolees. Also, the Board retained human services (program) monitors to assist parole officers in monitoring the delivery of substance abuse treatment by the newly funded private contractors in the communities, and to identify parolees who cannot become drug free in the community. The Board provided State funds to contract with private aftercare providers to leverage the Byrne funding for this program. In the 1999 Byrne Program year, the Board of Pardons and Paroles staff accomplished the following: Trained an additional 53 parole officers to serve as "coaches" to provide cognitive skills training to the increased number of substance abusing parolees requiring aftercare due to the RSAT Grant program. Conducted 101,253 drug tests, including 101,135 screens that yielded 9,260 positive drug tests. Determined that 734 parolees needed admission to intensive, prison-based substance abuse programs. In addition to drug testing, the Board of Pardons and Paroles is moving forward with programs to implement pilot reparative boards as part of a larger restorative justice movement in a community corrections setting primarily for state offenders in both urban and rural areas of the state as a mechanism for reducing crime by enhancing citizen involvement in the entire process. Juvenile Offender Treatment (Byrne Program Purpose Area 13) Local juvenile treatment proposals are now being considered by the Department of Juvenile Justice, the role of which was previously detailed earlier in this report. The responsibility for custody of juveniles committed to institutional custody within the State of Georgia rests exclusively with the Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice. 38 2001 Objectives The SAVOI project continues to provide treatment to hard-core and violence-prone substance abusing juvenile population utilizing residential substance abuse treatment (RSAT) funds. Byrne funds will no longer be used for the aftercare portion of the program due to the expiration of the program's eligibility under the 48-month rule. Strategy Priority #5 Improving the Criminal Justice System Statement of the Priority Issue: Improvement of the system by conducting initiatives to enhance prosecutorial, defender, and judicial resources, including information systems, court delay reduction programs and alternatives to traditional adjudication and incarceration; and, upgrading the public correctional resources in prisons and jails. Alternatives to Incarceration (Byrne Program Purpose Area 20) Alternatives to incarceration typically serve collateral purpose areas, often including elements of court delay reduction, offender treatment, and drug training and education. The Council has included some innovative efforts in this direction in this strategy. Student Transition and Recovery (STAR) Program First funded in 1998, this innovative project, which received $93,448.00 in Fiscal Year 1999, will continue in the 2000 strategy. A collaborative effort among the court system, Tattnall County School System, and the Georgia DJJ, the STAR program diverts youth from the juvenile justice system. Participants report to a host campus prior to school for exercise and military drill, after which they report to their regular school. After school, they return to the host campus to receive assistance with homework and to study or work on projects until their parents pick them up at 6:30 p.m. In order for the child to participate, the parent(s) must agree to attend parenting and related classes. The youth are also required to perform community service projects on weekends. Mentoring is provided by program supervisors. 2001 Objectives Due to the success of the Tattnall County Star Initiative, the Council has funded two additional local projects during the 2000 Grant Year in Rockdale and Long Counties. Enhancing Judicial or Prosecutorial Effectiveness (Byrne Program Purpose Area 10) The Council funded two video conferencing projects (Lumpkin County Magistrate Court and Georgia Indigent Defense Council) in 2000 to provide for the installation of closed circuit electronic equipment in the courts. This has enabled court filings to be processed with efficiency and security. Byrne funds have assisted in purchasing and installing the equipment as well as in training operators regarding its use. Also in 2000, funds were utilized to support the Fulton County Complaint Room initiative. This project represents a 24-hour operation staffed by prosecutors, investigators, legal assistants, and others. Their jobs are to receive, evaluate, screen, and process criminal cases initiated by police officers and private citizens at the time of an arrest. The 39 Complaint Room model impacts not only front-end case screening, but also every level of the criminal justice system. They project moves defendants rapidly through the justice system and drastically reduces the amount of time defendants spend in jail. Court Appearances include: The First Appearance Hearing, Expedited Plea Hearing, and the All-Purpose Hearing. Additionally, the Council funded an Electronic Warrant Interchange (EWI) System through the Bartow County Magistrate Court. Implementation of the EWI System enables the county to: *Effectively track and manage all warrants entered into the system *Reduce officer time involved in initial warrants by eliminating the time associated with driving from the Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) site to the Magistrate Court and the return trip in order to secure the warrant; *Reduce officer time expended on second or subsequent warrants by use of the System's Data Merge function; *Allow officer time saved to be used on "street level" law enforcement activities; and *Reduce funds expended on the use of law enforcement vehicles to transport officers to and from the Magistrate Court 2001 Objectives The Council will continue to fund innovative projects such as the aforementioned. Correctional Resource Upgrade (Byrne Program Purpose Area 11) As the State's inmate population continues to increase (surpassing 41,000 in 1999), the capacity and proper functioning of Georgia's prison system is vital to the criminal justice system. In recognition of the importance of this system, priority is given to projects of statewide impact or model local projects with a potential for replication, in preference to projects which focus only upon local issues or objectives which may not benefit other jurisdictions. The Georgia Prison System Expansion and Upgrades Continued expansion and upgrades of this system remain imperative if the State is to avoid adversely impacting the local jails during those periods when prison population increases above the state system's capacity, as occurred with substantial adverse impact to local jails in 1988 and 1989. Despite a reduction in both the rate and the number of violent crimes in Georgia, there has been a significant increase in the number of violent and sexual offenders who are serving an increasing percentage of their sentences in prison. Severe criminal penalties enacted by the General Assembly of Georgia, combined with stringent parole release policies adopted by the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, are contributing to a dramatic increase in the number of violent offenders incarcerated in Georgia prisons. As the State allocates funding increases for new facilities, additional staff, and operating costs for Georgia prisons, support of the correctional resource through the Byrne Program is critical to public safety. 40 The Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-In-Sentencing (VOITIS) funds will be utilized to assist in major prison construction projects in Georgia. Drug-testing initiatives in Georgia support the goals expressed in the VOITIS program, in the national and state drug control strategies, and those expressed in President Clinton's "Testing, Effective Sanctions, and Treatment" program. Programs which assure or assist in random and for-cause drug testing of appropriate categories of inmates, coupled with progressive sanctions, including meaningful and effective substance abuse treatment to assist non-violent alcohol and drug abusing offenders to recover from their disease and to avoid relapse into substance abuse and criminal behavior, are necessary to effectively manage inmate populations. These programs can decrease the number of nonviolent offenders cluttering up the prison system who are incarcerated because of their substance abuse addiction, or criminal acts committed to support their addiction. Projects fostering drug testing, treatment and other interventions are important in managing the prison population because such programs help prevent substance abusing offenders from adding to the prison growth which will inevitably occur as lawmaker's reaction to public outrage regarding violent crime, as expressed in the various Truth In Sentencing initiatives, inevitably leads to longer imprisonment of violent offenders and more crowded jails and prisons. 2000 State Prison Objectives: The state will continue to fund programs for expansion and upgrades of the prison system to maintain the anticipated growth in the violent inmate population. Byrne program funding will be used in coordination with State appropriations and other grant resources to fund programs that contribute to the overall enhancement of the correctional resource, including those which assist with drug testing, effective sanctions, and treatment of appropriate categories of substance abusing offenders. The Council will consider collaborative efforts to develop and implement day treatment centers. 2001 Objectives The Council is relying primarily upon VOITIS and Georgia State appropriations for correctional programming. However, the Council will look at diversion programs sponsored by the State Board of Pardons and Paroles and the Department of Corrections in the form of day treatment centers to address jail and prison overcrowding. According to prior research, the vast majority of community-based treatment programs have shown low success rates because they do not take a holistic approach to treating the offenders, taking into consideration other factors such as problem solving skills, deficits in their ability to interact socially, and impulsivity, employment, family, and other social and personal dimensions. Such centers provide a structured and effective community alternative to offenders on the front-end (probation) and on the back-end (parole). Jail Assistance Project Georgia Sheriffs' Association (GSA) In Georgia, the local Sheriff or a Sheriff-designated Jail Administrator, administer each of the 147 functional county jails in Georgia's 159 counties. While the State collaborates with the GSA to provide basic training and certification for newly elected Sheriffs, as well as basic and advanced peace officer training to Sheriffs and their Deputies, on-site technical assistance regarding the many problems facing the local jail administrator was conspicuously absent. Because the funding, staffing, and operations of each jail is different, and because there were no protocols or standards for administering these jails, the GSA convened several planning sessions with the Council staff to determine the feasibility of developing a viable project to address these unmet needs affecting Sheriffs statewide. The project resulting from this planning has included: training on a statewide basis for local jail administrators; on-site technical assistance at dozens of county jails; a standardized "Georgia Jail Polices and Procedures Manual;" a "Georgia Standards for Adult Pretrial Detention Facilities;" and a "Facility Self-Audit Manual." 41 In consideration of the anticipated increase in the State's prison population, the establishment of uniform policies, procedures, and training will assist the Sheriffs administering the 147 operational county jails in Georgia, as well as managing the projected increases in jail population which might occur as defendants sentenced to the prison system await an opening in the prison due to the burgeoning state prison population. The Jail Assistance Project reached its 48 month funding eligibility and has been redirected to state funding appropriations. GEMA Public Safety Intranet and Internet (Byrne Program Purpose Area 26) The Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 1996 was established as a result of a series of terrorist events in the United States and the recognition that the nation, states, and local governments had inadequate systems in place to combat these events. This Act was cognizant of the fact that comprehensive plans, specialized information, and training is paramount to addressing terrorism. This is a fact the State of Georgia knows all to well, as major incidents (i.e. Olympic Park Bombing, Abortion Clinic Bombings) have left the constant recognition that terrorism can be omnipresent. The key to mitigating terrorism in Georgia lies in the fusion of local existing capabilities with standardized training, the provision of equipment, and the coordination of command procedures. In past grant years, the Council allocated funds to the Georgia Department of Emergency Management (GEMA) for projects providing intensive training and a wide spectrum of resources for responding to terrorist incidents. The Georgia Terrorism Consequence Management, Excess Property, and Public Safety Intranet Projects were all initiatives funded under this purpose area. Due to the 48th Month Rule, these projects are no longer eligible for Byrne funds. The Results 1122 Program, administered by GEMA, utilizes the purchasing power of the federal government through the Defense Logistics Agency and General Services Administration by purchasing items which cannot be located under the excess property program and supplies. This project is to be funded in the upcoming year for the remainder of its 48-month eligibility. Drug Courts (Byrne Program Purpose Area 20) In response to the continued problem with substance abuse among Georgia's criminal justice population, the Council is making drug courts and/or other specialized courts designed to provide early intervention and substance abuse treatment for selected defendants. These courts will ensure immediate intervention, comprehensive screening and assessment, regular drug screening, periodic court appearances, and swift, graduated sanctions for noncompliance. In Georgia, the Supreme Court Committee on Substance Abuse and the Courts coordinates the growth and development of drug courts in the State, which afford less seriously drug addicted offenders an opportunity to receive drug treatment and counseling intervention through the court system. Drug courts use the coercive power of the criminal justice system to force low-level offenders into drug treatment; eligible defendants must adhere to strict requirements designed to end their dependence on drugs and alcohol. Following the success of the State's first three courts (Cobb County, Bibb County, and Fulton County), three new drug courts, Brunswick, Dublin, and Griffin, were implemented in Georgia. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has identified several other locations as possible drug court sites in Georgia, and the CJCC continues to coordinate Byrne program funding for start-ups. 42 Evaluation of Funded Programs An evaluation is a systematic assessment of the results or outcomes of program efforts to measure actual outcomes against the intended outcomes of the program; to discover achievement and results; to discover deviations from planned achievements; to judge the meaning that agencies must draw resources from their general appropriations for that specific worth of the program; to identify unintended consequences; and to recommend expansion, contraction, elimination, or modification of the program. Assessing the Effectiveness of Criminal Justice Programs, Assessment and Evaluation Handbook Series No. 1, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), 1994. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 established requirements that each program funded by Byrne Program formula grants must contain an evaluation component developed pursuant to federal guidelines. BJA states that the "purpose of evaluating each program is to assess how well it has been implemented and to assess the extent to which the activities funded have achieved the program's goals. Such assessments should be designed to provide administrators and policy makers with an improved understanding of whether specific activities accomplish their desired results of furthering the state strategy" (Program Guidance, BJA, 1988). Although federal law mandates the evaluation of Byrne-funded programs in order to ensure their accountability, evaluation activities undertaken by the states provide other important benefits as well. State administrators need periodic feedback to ascertain how effectively their multi-year strategies are achieving the articulated drug control and system improvement goals. Implementation and outcomes information can be used by criminal justice planners to revise, whenever necessary, state strategies to strengthen their chances of overall success. This information is also useful for determining whether (and when) to expand a particular project, to undertake similar projects in other jurisdictions, or to reallocate resources to other purposes. Through the evaluation mandate, states develop the capability to independently perform process and impact evaluations. Sub-grantees and other agencies are then guided by the State Administering Agency, in developing their own evaluation capabilities. While the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 provides no funding to NIJ and BJA for Byrne evaluations, both the NIJ and the BJA have actively promoted the idea of increasing the States' involvement in project evaluation as a way to compensate for the limited number of evaluations that the Federal agencies can sponsor. 2001 Objectives The Council is currently working in partnership with Abt Associates in an evaluation initiative funded through the National Institute of Justice. This initiative will assist the Council in evaluating Byrne funded multi-jurisdictional drug task forces throughout the State. Evaluation Capabilities of the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Traditionally, the Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council has conducted intricate and professional process evaluations of funded programs and initiatives, and has consistently solicited relevant information from State agencies and programs concerning the impact of those programs and initiatives. Currently, the Council is further developing its capability to evaluate initiatives and assist agencies in their own impact evaluation of funded programs. It is anticipated, however, that this leadership and example will translate to better planning and evaluation capabilities of all criminal justice agencies in Georgia. It is imperative that the model developed be comprehensive and well organized. 43 Through a recent reorganization of the Georgia Statistical Analysis Center (SAC), a Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) assisted program, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council is evolving into a comprehensive evaluation resource for state, county and municipal agencies throughout Georgia. With the collaboration of the SAC, the Council is implementing the following evaluation plan for the FY 2000 Byrne Memorial funding initiatives: Each applicant for funding will be required to establish quantifiable outcome or impact objectives of the planned initiative. While this has been expected in the past, subsequent steps by the Council will reinforce the objectives. Reaffirm Program Objectives Once the grant is awarded to an agency, they will be required to reaffirm the program objectives, with the expectation that the initative will be evaluated based on their accomplishment. Separate Program Objectives The Council will consider the program objectives developed by the agency or organization, separate them as to process or impact objectives and communicate those impressions to the agency or organization. Through this exercise, the agency and its officials will better understand the differences as well as the need to evaluate the impact of an initiative. Evaluation Activities In an effort to gather as much data as feasible to determine whether projects are effectively utilizing federal funds, the Council monitors sub-grantees quantitatively through financial evaluation and qualitatively through programmatic and performance evaluation. This process enables the Council to better assess future funding needs and requests while at the same time holding sub-grant recipients accountable for their use of public funds. The following section explains these efforts in detail. The Council's evaluation plan consists primarily of financial and onsite monitoring by staff members who also review quarterly report data submitted by each project. Staff members monitor each project by requiring extensive documentation of services provided as well as conducting random site visits. In addition, individual projects are visited upon request for technical assistance. Multijurisdictional Drug Task Forces Council staff members will develop a schedule in the upcoming year to formally monitor all of the multi-jurisdictional task forces on a regular basis. Interim scheduling and monitoring procedures are currently being implemented. Additionally, quarterly reports are submitted by all task forces and reviewed by staff members upon receipt. Summary data originating from the quarterly reports is subsequently created by Council staff. Twelve of the twenty-eight local multi-jurisdictional drug task forces have a GBI Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge (ASAC) as a commander. These task forces receive additional evaluation and oversight from GBI Regional Drug 44 Enforcement Offices (RDEO), that routinely conduct evaluations to assure conformance with GBI rules and regulations in their operational activities. This oversight provides added assurance that these task forces are run efficiently and effectively. As a result of these evaluations, the Council began a process to develop standard operating procedures manuals for the task forces. This project is in the final phase and will be very useful for the continued success of the task forces. State Projects These projects are continually evaluated by Council staff. Many of the State agency sub-grantees have a representative on the Council and attend periodic Council meetings. Also, many of the State agency project staff are members of other criminal justice related task forces and committees that Council representatives attend. This interaction allows for a less formal way of evaluating the projects by sharing information. They, too, are required to submit at least semiannual quarterly reports that are reviewed to determine the progress of the project. DARE For other programs such as DARE, staff are able to evaluate projects both financially and programmatically by reviewing culmination/ quarterly reports, reimbursement documentation, public input, and by providing technical assistance to DARE projects at their request. Many of the projects use the quarterly reports to bring to light innovative and unique elements of their projects. To assure efficiency in the program, the Council has increased the scrutiny of submitted financial documentation to what might best be termed an "audit" level. Each project has been given some technical assistance with programmatic and financial guidelines by personal contact with either the DARE instructor or the program administrator for each project. Modification of the quarterly report was made to eliminate some of the confusion concerning proper reporting of performance indicators, and a revised time sheet was developed so that the projects could more accurately document time allocated to the various DARE activities. Appropriate technical assistance was given to the projects to accomplish these changes, through correspondence, personal conference, or primarily, through personal contact with the program assistant or the senior program auditor. To assure that the officers present the program in an appropriate manner, in order to maintain their certification to teach DARE, each officer is required to complete annual in-service training, and in addition, on-site audits are conducted to monitor their classroom performance. This monitoring program includes not only those officers funded through BYRNE, but all officers involved in DARE instruction. To assure the appropriate level of efficiency is present, the audit is performed by investigators from the GBI who are assigned to teach the DARE instructor's curriculum at the state DARE training project. This site audit is performed twice yearly for each of the 389 officers currently DARE certified; therefore 798 unannounced on-site audits of DARE program instructors were scheduled. Feedback from these audits is used to identify areas for improvement in the individual officer's training skills, and to suggest areas that might need attention in the state's mandatory annual in-service DARE instructor training. 45 Financial audits required for the projects are conducted by annual audit of the sponsoring agency, which are provided to and reviewed by the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (the Council). However, under the current evaluation and monitoring plans in effect at the Council each monthly or quarterly reimbursement request from each project is reviewed by an experienced auditor in addition to the initial review by the program assistant assigned to monitor the project. 46