Report 2010-116 Recommendations and Responses in 2015-041

Report 2010-116: Sex Offender Commitment Program: Streamlining the Process for Identifying Potential Sexually Violent Predators Would Reduce Unnecessary or Duplicative Work

Department Number of Years Reported As Not Fully Implemented Total Recommendations to Department Not Implemented After One Year Not Implemented as of 2014-041 Response Not Implemented as of Most Recent Response
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 4 2 2 2 2
Department of State Hospitals 4 5 4 2 2

Recommendation To: State Hospitals, Department of

To eliminate duplicative effort and increase efficiency, Corrections should not make unnecessary referrals to Mental Health. Corrections and Mental Health should jointly revise the structured screening instrument so that the referral process adheres more closely to the law's intent.

Response

Previously reported on 10/2/14 that this will not be implemented

  • California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement
  • Response Date: September 2015

Recommendation To: State Hospitals, Department of

To reduce costs for unnecessary evaluations, Mental Health should either issue a regulation or seek a statutory amendment to clarify that when resolving a difference of opinion between the two initial evaluators of an offender, Mental Health must seek the opinion of a fourth evaluator only when a third evaluator concludes that the offender meets SVP criteria.

Response

Previously reported on 10/2/2014 that this will not be implemented.

  • California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement
  • Response Date: September 2015

Recommendation To: Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of

To eliminate duplicative effort and increase efficiency, Corrections should not make unnecessary referrals to Mental Health. For example, Corrections should better leverage the time and work it already conducts by including in its referral process (1) determining whether the offender committed a predatory offense, (2) reviewing results from any previous screenings and evaluations that Mental Health completed and considering whether the most recent parole violation or offense might alter the previous decision, and (3) using STATIC-99R to assess the risk that an offender will reoffend.

Response

CDCR has not changed our course of action. Our determination remains the same as what has been previously submitted.

The California Supreme Court discussed the SVPA's "predatory" provisions in the case Torres v. Supreme Court (2001) 25 Cal.4th 680. The Court rejected the argument that the SVPA required the Trier of fact at the SVP trial to find that the prior sex offenses were predatory. Because non-predatory offenses can form the basis of a court's ultimate SVP determination, CDCR must not screen out offenders on this basis. CDCR/BPH determined that the DSH clinical assessment is the preferred method to predict future predatory behavior.

Due to the Public Safety Realignment Act, CDCR no longer receives parole violators. CDCR/BPH reviews previous screening results and refers the case to the DSH. CDCR/BPH believes that DSH is better qualified to determine whether the current offense would alter a prior determination based on a clinical evaluation of the current offense and its possible physiological connectedness with the previous sex offense.

Further, CDCR does not agree with the recommendation. With the implementation of Public Safety Re-alignment, referrals to DSH have decreased significantly (reduced by 55 to 60 Percent) due to the loss of the Revocation Cases.

CDCR/BPH/DSH concluded that the collaborative screening between CDCR and DSH is the most efficient method to eliminate duplicative efforts, and to best utilize each agencies resources to best conserve the limited resources of qualified and available mental health clinicians that otherwise would not be a cost savings to the State.

Predicting future sexual dangerousness is an extraordinarily complex undertaking, and there are a limited number of clinicians available; however, since the 2012 Corrective Action Plan response, DSH has increased its pool of available clinicians.

  • California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement
  • Completion Date:
  • Response Date: October 2014

Recommendation To: Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of

To eliminate duplicative effort and increase efficiency, Corrections should not make unnecessary referrals to Mental Health. Corrections and Mental Health should jointly revise the structured screening instrument so that the referral process adheres more closely to the law's intent.

Response

A collaborative review of the structured screening instruments by CDCR, BPH and DSH resulted in no change to one of the instruments (CDCR 7377). The CDCR 7377 SVP Screening form was not revised because it was collectively determined that the form currently adheres to the law's intent, pursuant to the January 25, 2011, Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CDCR, BPH and DSH. A clinical review was also developed of the performance of the sexually violent predator screening functions described in WIC 6601(b). The clinical review served as an update to the structured screening instrument as required by statute.

In accordance with the MOU, it was agreed upon by all entities that DSH will provide the clinical review as to whether the case may meet the statutory requirements commencing with WIC 6600, prior to referring for a full evaluation.

  • California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement
  • Completion Date:
  • Response Date: October 2014

Current Status of Recommendations

All Recommendations in 2015-041