Before you run…..

1. Before you run….. This version of the presentation is modified to be viewed without presenter. It’s helpful to follow the following instructions: See this at the end of most slide, this icon links back to the main slide. Click it when you see it. See this in the main slide, this icon links to the slide detailing that step. Click it when you see it. If you don’t see the two above icons, use “” (enter) key or “” (right arrow) key to navigate the presentation

2. … • The Sentencing Guidelines Commission promotes accountability and equity in adult and juvenile sentencing, provides accurate and timely information about sentencing, and recommends improvements in the criminal justice system. • According to statue, Superior Court Criminal Rule 7.2 and Juvenile Court Rule 7.12, the clerk of the courts or the juvenile court forwards copies of all judgment and sentence forms and every disposition order, adjudication or deferred adjudication, to the Commission. When sentences depart from the standard sentence range or when the juvenile court imposes a sentence based upon a finding of manifest injustice, courts also submit written findings of fact and conclusions of law to the Commission. • The Commission in Olympia currently receives the judgment and sentence forms in three different ways: paper copies sent through post office, electronic copies sent through e-mail, and by accessing to King county’s website. • In average, the Commission received and enter approximately 29K adult felony judgment and sentence forms and 12K juvenile dispositions from all 39 counties. The forms average between five to ten pages in length, depending the inclusion of findings and conclusions. Forms vary from counties to counties. The Commission staff pre-process the forms by opening the mail, stamping receiving date, identifying judges before entering into the database. • The Commission is required to conduct ongoing research aimed at sentencing practices relating to the improvement of the adult criminal and the juvenile justice systems. Based on available information, the Commission is also obliged to submit biennial reports to the legislature and the governor covering racial disproportionality in juvenile and adult sentencing; the capacity of state and local juvenile and adult facilities and resources; and recidivism information on adult and juvenile offenders.

3. Revisit March 13, 2009 WASHINGTON STATESENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION HOW WE COLLECT, CHECK,PROCESS, AND USE SENTENCING DATA March 14, 2008 Duc Luu

4. Electronic copies 1 2 3 4 New laws implemented Business logic improved Paper copies SCAN & BACK-UP Website (King co.) Pre-process OK RAW SGC DATA ENTER CHECK 39 counties AOC DATA Not OK Send letter to judges, PA, DA for sentence clarification Not OK Request missing J&S or Dispositions OK MATCH not OK CLEAN OK not OK β - REPORT 1986, 1987, 1988… 2008 Annual OK “BIG” SGC DATA SGC DATA FREEZE DOC DATA Pre-process RESEARCH PROJECTS WSP DATA REQUESTS FISCAL NOTES REPORTS AOC DATA COLLECT

5. Accomplished 150+ IMPROVEMENT IN PROCESS • Research team on mission • Improved pre-process procedures • Data entry protocols • 4-layer quality assurance: • More data checking & cleaning queries added (60+) • Expedite communication for sentence clarification • Beta (preliminary/trial-and-error) reports implemented • Work with new programmers to redesign database • Set up first step in data sharing with DOC, WSP, AOC

6. SGC: Small but Critical SGC: Small but Critical to Sentencing Among criminal justice agencies, only the Sentencing Guidelines Commission collects and maintains sentencing data (both jail and prison) which is used to: • Evaluate and monitor adult and juvenile sentencing policies and practices • Recommend modifications to the Governor and the legislature on adult and juvenile sentencing • Provide critical un-biased prison and jail bed impact prediction One example…..

7. SGC’s Data + DOC’sdata SGC Fiscal Notes CTED AOC DOC AGO OFM SGC: Small but Critical to Sentencing

8. QUESTIONS & SUGGESTIONS • . Duc Luu, Data Program Manager, ducl@sgc.wa.gov, (360) 407-1075

9. REPORTS • Annual • Statistical Summary of Adult Felony Sentencing • Juvenile Disposition Summary • Adult Judicial Sentencing Practices • Persistent Offender Sentencing • Adult Sentencing Guidelines Manual • Juvenile Disposition Manual • Biennial • Recidivism of Adult Felony Offenders • Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders • Disparity & Disproportionality in Adult Felony Sentencing • Disparity & Disproportionality in Juvenile Sentencing.

10. β (preliminary) REPORTS • Race disproportionality: too many J&S forms without race or gender? • Check current fiscal year data against prior year one: some significant discrepancies? • Any mitigated exceptional sentence with aggravated reasons? Or vice versa • Review 2 strikers or 3 strikers sentences • Offenders’ eligibility for SSOSA, DOSA, first-time offender waiver • Etc .

11. REQUESTS In order of priority: • SGC Commission members • Legislature • Governor • Other federal/state agencies • Research institutions, criminal justice organizations • Public.

12. CHECK (60+ queries) • If sentenced outside of standard range/grid, is it an exceptional sentence? • If exceptional, missing reason? • Missing required data (missing a page of J&S) • Invalid date of birth, too old or too young • Did all persistent offenders get life sentence? • Marked as FTOW with an offense in history • Etc.

13. CLEAN (60+ queries) Run the step “CHECK” again & add: • Review all J&S forms when a juvenile was sentenced as an adult • Review all legitimate J&S forms that the entry program did not accept due to lack of program support. • Were violation of chapter 69.50 sentenced using the drug grid? • Any multiple-offense J&S with sentence based on secondary offense instead of primary offense? • Any qualifying sex offender was not sentenced as a non-persistent sex offenders? • Review all life and death sentences for eligibility • Etc.

14. FISCAL NOTES • Provide un-biased prison/jail bed impact prediction • Meet with fiscal note technical workgroup to discuss assumptions to be used for the upcoming session • Get raw historical data from DOC • Create hypothetical dataset based on the assumptions • Compute additional useful data ready for fiscal notes (prison discount, phase-in factors) • Apply “convergent validity” to all data • Prepare commonly used fiscal note narrative templates.

15. RESEARCH PROJECTS • Commission • Federal • Inter-agency projects • Legislature • Provide SGC data to others for their own research.

16. J & S and disposition submission The majority of counties now transfers J&S and juvenile dispositions electronically. Compared with regular mail: • Faster (immediately vs. 3-4 days) • Secure (Less loss than in regular mail, backed-up on server) • Increase efficient use of time and equipment • Annual savings (mailing and paper cost):Counties: $10,500 (Juvenile) + $32,400 (Adult) = $42,900SGC : $ 7,800 (Juvenile) + $15,200 (Adult) = $23,000 • Allow data entry staff to have more time for quality assurance.

17. Turn Around Time (from receiving date to entering date) • Data available sooner for quality assurance • Tracking counties submission pattern through years to alert staff sooner to missing data or anomalies to counties.

18. Clarify Sentence (…) (from the date J&S entered to the date letter sent to counties) • Accurate data available sooner for testing • Quick & higher ratio of responses from sentencing participants

19. Clarify Sentence (cont.) • Accurate data available sooner for testing • Quick & higher ratio of responses from sentencing participants.

20. SGC Record 101 Record 101 Record 907 Record 907 WSP SGC SGC DOC AOC Data Element Completion • Retrieve old verified data to fill missing current ones • Borrow data from WSP, DOC, AOC

21. 2% SGC WSP SGC SGC 98% DOC AOC Data Element Completion (cont. 1) • Use WSP, DOC, AOC to verify SGC data

22. Data Element Completion (cont. 2) • Percentage of data completion