Connecting Practice, Data and
Research
C
Connecticut’s
i ’ Contractor
C
Data
D C
Collection
ll i SSystem
Maureen DeLude
Program Manager
CT Judicial Branch
Court Support Services Division
Barbara Pierce Parker
Managing Associate
Crime and Justice Institute at CRJ
Introductions and Learning
Objectives

By the end of the session, we hope you
understand:
◦ Why we invested in comprehensive statewide data
collection
◦ Key elements of correctional treatment data
collection
◦ Wh
What’s
’ involved
l d in implementing
l
ad
data system withh a
variety of contracted correctional treatment
p g
programs
A Little History



CT Judicial Branch Court Support Services Division
is under the leadership of the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court and the Chief Court Administrator
1,600 Employees
Functions:
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
Adult Services – Bail and Probation
Juvenile Probation
Juvenile Detention
Family Relations – DV and Civil
Contracted Treatment Services
Administration
“The Mission of CSSD is to provide effective support services within the Judicial
Branch by working collaboratively with system stakeholders to promote
compliance with court orders and instill positive change in individuals, families
and communities.
communities.”
A Little History
51,000 adult pprobationers supervised
p
on
any given day
O
On ave
average,
age, 16,000
6,000 pprobationers
obat o e s aaree
involved in programming or treatment with
private providers
p
p
 These providers deliver more than 20
program models
models”
“program

A Little History

More than a decade
ago, adopted the
principles
p
p of
effective
intervention
internally and with
private pprovider
its p
network
Crime and Justice Institute at Community Resources for Justice
(2009). Implementing Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in
Community Corrections, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: National
Institute of Corrections
A Little History
In 2007, the Legislature’s
g
Appropriations
pp p
Committee adopted Results Based
Accountabilityy (RBA)
(
)*
 Critical planning tool for the budgetary
p
process
 Provides a framework to determine a
program’ss impact on the citizens of the
program
State of Connecticut

*RBA was developed by Mark Friedman of the Fiscal Policy Studies Institute
A Little History

RBA asks 3 questions
q
◦ How much do we do?
◦ How well do we do it?
◦ Is anyone better off?

CSSD piloted RBA with its internal
departments and its contracted providers
◦ Added incentive for data collection as budget
decision made through the lens of RBA
The Missing Data Link
Recidivism
D t
Data
What is CDCS?

Contractor Data Collection System
◦ Web-based, secure system
◦ Specific to each program model

Collects client level data from CSSD’s
network of private correctional treatment
providers
id
What data is collected?
Referral
Intake
Assessment
Services (group and individual)
Program
rogra Outcomes
o s & Discharge
D s arg
CDCS DESIGN
Gather Information

Purpose
◦G
Gain a comprehensive
h
understanding
d
d off how
h
a
model works
◦ Determine what information to collect and how
to organize/display the data elements

Products
◦ A design document to include:
 Names and definitions for all data elements, all
dropdowns and other response options, and proposed
screen layouts (the “what”)
what )
 Logic (the “how”)
◦ A user manual (ideally)
◦ Risk
Ri k reduction
d ti indicators
i di t
(d
(developed
l
d using
i RBA)
Gather Information

Process
◦ Review program model RFP, contracts,
relevant policies
◦ Meet with stakeholders
 CSSD Adult or Juvenile Programs and Services staff
 Probation and Bail regional managers
 A sample or all of the Program Directors for the
model being designed
Gather Information







What are the program model’s outcomes?
Wh refers
Who
f
clients?
l
? What
Wh is the
h referral
f
l
process?
Who is served? Are there any clients it is
important to track separately?
How does intake occur? What is done at
intake? What assessments are done?
What services are offered?
Wh t is
What
i d
done to
t link
li k clients
li t with
ith other
th
services in the community?
What is the discharge process?
Program and Test
Programmer
g
creates screens and backend
tables according to design document
 Internal
te a team
tea tests
 Volunteer providers test
 Correct bugs and add identified
enhancements before release

CDCS
IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation

Train users
◦
◦
◦
◦

4-6 hours for new users
Overview of CDCS
H d on practice
Hands
i
Review of definitions and CDCS features
Pilot and revise
◦ Voluntary basis
2-4
4 providers
◦2

Rollout
◦ Trainingg
◦ Implementation visits
Implementation

Develop reports for
◦ Providers
◦ Contract monitors
◦ Probation, Bail, Family Services

Quality assurance
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
Help desk
Data quality reports
D quality
Data
l reviews
Data definitions
U
User
manuals
l & online
li ttraining
i i
A “DEMONSTRATION”
DEMONSTRATION
Referral

Information is pre-populated from Case Management
Information System based on case number
Intake

Built in logic to ensure data are completed
Assessments
LSI-R and ASUS-R
 Program model-specific assessments

Services and Group Logs
Referrals to Outside Services

Track connections to community to
pp
post-program
p
p g
ensure support
Activity Logs
Case Management
 Urinalysis and Breathalyzer

Discharge
When and why client is discharged
 Outcomes achieved during program

REPORTS
Report Features

Report visibility
◦ Log in determines report availability

Parameters
Export
p
 Click through
 Comparisons with other program
locations and statewide figures

Types of Reports Available

How much do we do?
◦ Client Lists
◦ Demographics
◦ Program Activity

How well do we do it?
◦ Data Quality
◦ Completion Rates

Is anyone better off?
◦ Risk Reduction

Other
Administrative
 Data Export
 Client Level

Utilization
Click Through Feature
Completion Rates
How We Use the Data: An Example
p


Concern about low completion rates
(33.8%) for bail clients at the Alternative in
the Community program
R reportt showing
Ran
h i program discharge
di h
reasons
 Large percentage discharged because case
was disposed while clients were at the
AICs
How We Use the Data: An Example
p




Met with Bail Regional Managers
D
Determined
d that
h Bail
B l had
h d no consistent way
of knowing how long clients should be at
AIC
Added a data element to CDCS so Bail
would know the projected end date for
services
i
Anticipated completion dates are now
p y on the progress
p g
report
p
generated
g
displayed
in CDCS and sent to Bail
How We Use the Data: An Example
p

This has resulted in smaller percentages of
b il clients
bail
li t bbeing
i removed
d bbefore
f
having
h i th
the
opportunity to complete the AIC services
Case Disposed Discharges for Bail AIC Clients
30%
28%
25%
25%
26%
24%
22%
20%
18%
19%
19%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Q1 2009
Q2 2009
Q3 2009
Q4 2009
Q1 2010
Q2 2010
Q3 2010
Q4 2010
Risk Reduction Indicators

Built set of reports
p
for Probation, Bail and
Family Service and contracted providers
to measure agency
g y performance
p
and
client/public safety outcomes
Comparisons to All Locations
Risk Reduction Indicators – How
We Use Them

Quarterlyy Adult Risk Reduction meetings
g
◦
◦
◦
◦
Probation
Bail
Family Services
Adult Providers
Present and review all indicators
 Identify how each entity impacts and can
assist others

Risk Reduction Indicators –
Examples of How We Use Them

Probation indicator
◦ Discussion with adult service providers:
 Are clients showingg upp to the program?
p g
If not, what can
probation do to ensure clients show for the program?
How can programs do better to engage clients?
 Are there enough groups running to accommodate the
number of referrals probation is making? If not, why?
Risk Reduction Indicators –
Examples of How We Use Them

AIC indicator
◦ Discussion with adult probation and bail:
 What are probation and bail doing to encourage participation
in services?
 Do probation and bail need more information from AICs in
order to more effectively support client participation?
Client Level Reports
Progress
g
Report
p
 Discharge Report
 Service Team Meeting Form
 Case Management History
 Substance
S b
T
Testing
i Hi
History

LESSON LEARNED
Lessons Learned - Time
Accept
p that system
y
development
p
takes a
LONG time
 Use p
project
oject pplanning
a
g methods
et o s to set
realistic time frames
 Implement one service type at a time
 Allow sufficient time for implementation
before using the data

Lessons Learned - Design


Start simple
Design with the end user in mind
◦ Does the data layout match business flow?
◦ Do the names of data elements, drop downs, etc.
have meaning to the user?

For every data element,
element ask yourself:
◦ What you we do with this information?
pp
risk
◦ How will havingg this information support
reduction?


Avoid “scope creep”
Build in flexibility
Lessons Learned – Buy
Buy--in
Include wide ggroupp of stakeholders in
design
S
Show
ow internal
te a and
a external
e te a stakeholders
sta e o e s
how they will benefit
 Respond quickly to issues and data
requests
 Use feedback to improve the data system
and give credit for suggestions

Lessons Learned – Implementation
Include both line staff and management
g
in
the implementation process
 Provide
ov e hands
a s on
o training
ta g
 Provide on-going support beyond training
 Be prepared to uncover programmatic
issues – have mechanism to address

Lesson Learned – Data Quality





Clearly define data elements and
expectations
t ti
suchh as time
ti
fframes ffor data
d t
entry
Ideally, QA will be done by both the service
provider and the funder
Create tools such as exception reports and
ti li
timeliness
reports
t
Develop a reward system for positive
performance
Support poor performers by providing
concrete feedback and helping them develop
strategies
i for
f improvement
i
Example of a Timeliness Report
Shows amount of
d entry in the
data
h
specified period
Shows the % of data
entry within the
required 5 business day
time frame
Example of an Exception Report
This report lists data entry that
looks atypical. Users are asked to
review each item for accuracy.
Lessons Learned – Using the Data
Allow several months of implementation
p
before using data
 Define,
e e, define,
e e, define!
e e!
 Find ways to reduce workload
 Defend against information overload
 Create a forum to discuss the story
b hi d the
behind
th numbers
b

To sum it up in one word:
Where are we now?
10 p
program
g
models input
p data in 115
locations across the state
 500 use
userss
 96,974 referral records to date
 170 help desk requests per month
 More and more data requests

Where are we headed?
Electronic referral
 Probation officer access
 Reduction in paper reporting
 Integration with billing

QUESTIONS?